> 
> 
> >It struck me that interpretation of security issues are quite often
> >OS-specific.  That, coupled with the fact that security programs have to
> >be tuned slightly for your file system hierarchy, userlevel programs, etc.,
> >could be sufficient reason to form a list.
> [...]
> >Ideally, there would be two lists, one for relevant announcements, and
> >one for discussion.
> >In particular, the announcements should be low-volume and there should
> >be a few people in charge of reading other specific security lists and
> >reporting relevant bits.
> 
> The FreeBSD folks have something similar (though I don't know the
> nature of the traffic on the lists), in freebsd-security and
> freebsd-security-notifcations.
> 

AS one of the firewall maintainers for 'Nuke's R Us', I cannot imagine
that there would be enough difference (I'll grant a little) between the
issues we would deal with in NetBSD-sec... and FreeBSD-sec.... Most of
this stiff is still (basically) 4.4BSD stuff.  

As a compromise, would it make sense to ask for the *BSD-security set of
mailing lists and just tag along with the FreeBSD folks?

-- 
Dave Burgess  (The man of a thousand E-Mail addresses)
386bsd FAQ Maintainer / SysAdmin for the NetBSD system in my spare bedroom
"Just because something is stupid doesn't mean that there isn't someone
that wants to do it...."