Re: [SM-USERS] SECURITY: SquirrelMail Web Server Status, and Plugins Update

On 7/31/09, Jim McIntyre wrote: > First, thanks very much, as others have said, for the thorough and > thoughtful way you handled this situation. Thanks for your understanding. >> Plugins Compromise >> - -- >> During the initial announcement, we'd mentioned that we did not >> bel

Re: [SM-USERS] SECURITY: SquirrelMail Web Server Status, and Plugins Update

First, thanks very much, as others have said, for the thorough and thoughtful way you handled this situation. > Plugins Compromise > - -- > During the initial announcement, we'd mentioned that we did not > believe that any of the plugins had been compromised. Further > investigat

Re: [SM-USERS] SECURITY: SquirrelMail Web Server Status, and Plugins Update

Thanks to you and all the team for all your hard work resolving this issue. Having the server compromised is the stuff of all our nightmares. We are grateful for the professional way the issue has been handled. Thank you all again David Ford Jon Angliss wrote: > All, > > We apologies for the ex

[SM-USERS] SECURITY: SquirrelMail Web Server Status, and Plugins Update

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All, We apologies for the extended downtime for the SquirrelMail plugins repository, and some of the SquirrelMail site documentation. Unfortunately due to conflicting time schedules, and some miss-communications amongst the team (mostly my fault), the