Weekly Edition
Return to the Security page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
The last updated vulnerabilities section
It would seem that the majority of the readers of this page are willing to part with the updated vulnerabilities section. Based on the comments we got over the last two weeks, we decided to remove it in future editions. So, this is the last week you will find one on the security page. You can always visit http://lwn.net/Vulnerabilities/ to get a look at the most recent vulnerabilities in our database.
(Log in to post comments)
The last updated vulnerabilities section Posted Mar 27, 2008 4:22 UTC (Thu) by mrons (subscriber, #1751) [Link] Does the whole section have to go? What about a table similar to the vulnerabilities page itself listing just the latest alerts that we can click through for more detail? The problem for me with the current page is that it is too long. I still scan the headings though. A short table would be ideal.
The last updated vulnerabilities section Posted Apr 9, 2008 17:28 UTC (Wed) by amh2 (guest, #51497) [Link] I agree -- please can we have a short table: I generally scan quickly even now.
Do please continue to track the vulns Posted Mar 27, 2008 22:04 UTC (Thu) by mkflint (guest, #50223) [Link] While I do appreciate the time and effort LWN puts into maintaining the Vulns section, it is rather too wordy for me - so I skip through it most weeks. I think I now trust the maintainers of my distribution to fix vulnerabilities in a timely fashion, and would expect any serious new vulns to be addressed in a LWN article in their own right. (The recent 'vmsplice' articles would be a good example) Please do keep up the good work in tracking vulnerabilities, as I feel reassured knowing that LWN is a reliable place for unbiased information about these issues. Matthew
The last updated vulnerabilities section Posted Mar 28, 2008 8:12 UTC (Fri) by jgsack@san.rr.com (guest, #33287) [Link] I'm wondering if the 20 lines per page design is intended to discourage access (perhaps saving on bandwidth cost?). Would it be useful to have some alternative display or download options, so that this resource would be more easily browsed/searched by those who might wish to see all. Regards, ..jim
Want more lines per page? Posted Mar 28, 2008 13:09 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] Twenty is just a number that I found from...somewhere...when bashing out that code. The bandwidth cost of a few vulnerability entries is not worth worrying about.If you like a bigger display, bookmark the page with an additional, say, ?n=60 on the URL and you'll get more.
The last updated vulnerabilities section Posted Mar 31, 2008 11:46 UTC (Mon) by liljencrantz (subscriber, #28458) [Link] As I am not a sysadmin, I usually skip over the vulnerabilities list. I do read the security articles (like all other articles on LWN) with interest. I suspect I am not alone in reading Playb^W LWN for the articles, not for the autogenerated content.
|
|
||||||||||||