Subject: Re: rfc2228 in ftpd
To: Theo de Raadt <>
From: Jason R Thorpe <>
List: tech-security
Date: 06/30/2002 19:02:54
On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 07:42:23PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:

 > 4 messages directly on topic were not sent through until I asked for
 > them to be sent through.  Then they were sent through.  Was sending
 > them through a mistake, or was blocking them a mistake?  Can you
 > please clarify?

Only the moderator of the list in question can clarify that.  You'll
have to ask that person.

 > Hugh's messages in port-vax with booting bug fixes were also censored
 > and he had to replace his email address.

Hugh's messages are not censored.  They are bounced to the moderator
if they originate from the domain.  The moderator of the
port-vax mailing list has historically approved all of Hugh's posts,
and I have received word that this is the case for all recent posts
(unfortunately, there was a backlog in that moderator's queue).

 > This is a message which was blocked until after:
 > Was this above message not relevant?

At the very least, I would certainly not classify the message you cite
as constructive.  It was certainly "relevant" to the subject at hand,
but was filled with accusatory remarks and has an overly-aggressive tone.
That's generally not the ways adults carry on a conversation.

Especially that last paragraph -- I mean, no where in my mail (as you cite
here below) did I accuse you of being untrustworthy.  I did say that the
way the OpenSSH hole event transpired was not a trust-building experience,
but that is not the same thing as accusing you of being untrustworthy.

However, my opionion about the appropriateness of your message is
irrelevant.  The moderator of tech-security's is.

 > It was in response to this message:
 > Does this above message meet the requirements, where mine doesn't?

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <>