zlib advisory - (ben_tilly) - (16) - March 11, 2002, 05:46:41 PM EST
         Re: zlib advisory - a similar link. - (a6l6e6x) - March 11, 2002, 11:25:28 PM EST
         Remedy? - (kmself) - (3) - March 12, 2002, 12:12:38 AM EST
             Erg. - (static) - March 12, 2002, 12:27:49 AM EST
             Well OpenBSD was never vulnerable. :-) - (ben_tilly) - (1) - March 12, 2002, 12:41:28 AM EST
                 OpenBSD as server - (kmself) - March 12, 2002, 01:51:32 PM EST
         Re: zlib advisory - (pwhysall) - (1) - March 12, 2002, 02:29:24 AM EST
             Re: zlib and up2date - (a6l6e6x) - March 12, 2002, 02:29:21 PM EST
         Microsoft vulnerable too - uses zlib code - (admin) - (2) - March 14, 2002, 10:07:28 PM EST
             Risk: adopting FS code without adopting FS practices - (kmself) - (1) - March 15, 2002, 01:45:18 AM EST
                 But note that MS doesn't update the build #'s - (tonytib) - March 15, 2002, 09:37:37 PM EST
         I'm confused about the entire thing - (wharris2) - (5) - March 14, 2002, 11:08:50 PM EST
             DoS is an attack - (ben_tilly) - (4) - March 14, 2002, 11:38:03 PM EST
                 Re: DoS is an attack - (wharris2) - (3) - March 15, 2002, 12:08:18 AM EST
                     Then I suggest... - (Yendor) - (1) - March 15, 2002, 09:56:32 AM EST
                         I've run into double-free problems before - (wharris2) - March 16, 2002, 10:05:44 AM EST
                     It's a known class of exploit... - (kmself) - March 15, 2002, 02:12:46 PM EST