Jenny_Hopkins(a)toby-churchill.com writes:
> I've been thinking about this reply for a day or two. I was actually bit
> shocked by it. With all respect to the guys who run the show, I wonder if
> you mean to be so elitist? [...]
Whoa whoa whoa! It's not intended to be elitist, it's just a
self-defence mechanism. Indeed, the point I was trying to make was
that OK, ALUG is informal, but we can't let anything go. Security
announcements are blatantly best done elsewhere, else malicious types
could put out alerts that most of us don't have the knowledge to check
and we stop getting any useful work done.
There are countless other mailing lists for security announcements.
It would be a shame if this list becomes another one and kills our
user group in the process. I doubt anyone wants that. Similarly job
ads: from some discussions, I'd suggest either adopting Adam's
proposal of only allowing a few people to vet and post job ads, to
point people to some jobs site or other, or to set up an alug-jobs
mailing list.
It's probably time to compile a list "Charter" or FAQ, pointing people
towards other more appropriate resources for common requirements like
good security alerts. Anyone able to help on this?
> PS. I am running 6.2 and had no idea that patches were needed.
Read The Fine Manuals. You should *always* follow security
announcements, regardless of distribution, operating system, etc. All
computers are insecure, except when switched off and locked away.
Perhaps a "Securing Linux" talk or two at the next meeting? Any
takers?
Once again, I'm sorry if I upset or intimidated anyone. That wasn't
my intention at all. Please don't take it as such. Like the job ads,
there's a real danger we could drown in real (new and old) and fake
security alerts, which would kill this list. I just didn't want that
to happen.
The open atmosphere on here is something I love, but sometimes a
little note of caution has to be sounded. Sorry for making it a bit
loud this time.
--
MJR