On 2/18/19 1:08 PM, Daniel M. Capella via arch-devops wrote:
On February 18, 2019 4:57:16 AM EST, Morten Linderud via arch-devops <arch-devops@lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 04:48:57AM -0500, Daniel M. Capella via arch-devops wrote:
It would be a bit benefitial if you made an argument instead of posting a link.
Learned about it after a check for that file was added to twa[]. Shared as it was relevant.
You shared a contextless link without explaining why it is relevant. Actually, you're still asserting that it is relevant without explaining why it is relevant -- this is particularly intriguing given that it seems other people are counter-asserting that it is not relevant.
As we're requiring encrypted communications (IIUC), it looks like that's been a fairly effective barrier.
Do we require encrypted communications? Or was that simply recommended to other people being brought as comparisons? Either way -- filtering the emails for encrypted communications is still a nonzero task. Why engage in additional efforts to support this security.txt thing, when assertations have been made that it is not beneficial at all, and furthermore, the *location* where the list of security contacts is stored is entirely offtopic in this discussion about unifying the actual contacts to list, as a method of preventing leakage and other confusion when members are added and removed from that list, and/or the potential for people with outdated information to encrypt data to a recipient that is no longer supposed to have access to such information. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User