Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 22847 invoked by uid 6000); 30 Dec 1997 19:21:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 22839 invoked from network); 30 Dec 1997 19:21:30 -0000 Received: from valis.worldgate.com (marcs@198.161.84.2) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 30 Dec 1997 19:21:30 -0000 Received: from localhost (marcs@localhost) by valis.worldgate.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA29592 for ; Tue, 30 Dec 1997 12:21:29 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 30 Dec 1997 12:21:29 -0700 (MST) From: Marc Slemko To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] 1.3: "DoS" attack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org When did you send it? I'm starting to see completely incorrect speculation and third party patches appearing... On Tue, 30 Dec 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Dec 1997, Marc Slemko wrote: > > > +1 on both. > > > > Someone should post an "unofficial" (ie. representing them as a group > > member, not the group) followup to bugtraq saying: > > I did already. But didn't say much other than "I think you'll find all > network services have a DoS attack... but there's a lameness that's easily > patched". > > Dean > >