2.6 isn't vulnerable

2.6 isn't vulnerable

Posted May 19, 2005 6:59 UTC (Thu) by komarek (guest, #7295)
In reply to: 2.6 isn't vulnerable by gregkh
Parent article: Responding to the kernel ELF vulnerability

Comments and content like this from gregkh, are why I pay for and read LWN. How many slashdot posts would I have to read to get the same information, with the same confidence? Thanks corbet and gregkh for keep us all in-the-know.

---

to post comments

2.6 isn't vulnerable

Posted May 19, 2005 7:22 UTC (Thu) by jhs (guest, #12429) [Link]

I actually specifically clicked on the comments just to post a similar message about the LWN content. So I guess I will put it here. The LWN kernel section is excellent.