Re^2: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem?

What is it about? It's about Reini either imagining a nonexistent problem (very likely) or being unable to adequately explain a problem he's found to the satisfaction of all experts (very unlikely).

Its also about chip being coy

Comment on Re^2: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? by chip (Curate) on Sep 06, 2012 at 03:36 UTC
"Coy?" Please explain. I am confused. (edited to remove reference to accidental anonymity, which did not apply)	[reply]
Re^4: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? by Anonymous Monk on Sep 06, 2012 at 07:23 UTC
"Coy?" Please explain. I am confused. (edited to remove reference to accidental anonymity, which did not apply) Very simple, any thread you look at, its always you trading insults with someone -- and you just did it again in Re: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? -- yeah chip, we saw that already in the other thread, we're not on the private security list, we're wondering what the issue is, if it isn't real, well then EXPOSE it	[reply]
Re^5: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? by chip (Curate) on Sep 06, 2012 at 22:37 UTC
That's not how security response teams work. They accept reports, make patches, and coordinate releases for bugs. They don't publicize non-bugs. Also, Reini already publicized it. Didn't notice? Yeah, that's because it's not a problem, so far as anyone can figure. (edited to add 2nd paragraph) -- Chip Salzenberg, Free-Floating Agent of Chaos	[reply]
Re^6: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? by Anonymous Monk on Sep 07, 2012 at 03:14 UTC
Re^7: Perl 5.16 binary filename security problem? by chip (Curate) on Sep 07, 2012 at 05:00 UTC