[Bug 296867] Re: empathy needs to support OTR encryption

2009-10-27 Thread Omnifarious
Yay! Though, I looked over XTLS and I think it's a horrible idea. The worst part of TLS is x.509 certificates for a whole host of different reasons, and one reason OTR works so well is it adopts the ssh model of verification over the stupid x.509 model which doesn't really work for anything but d

[Bug 296867] Re: empathy needs to support OTR encryption

2009-09-23 Thread Omnifarious
This shouldn't be considered a 'Wishlist' item. A browser without https support is considered broken, not under-featured. The same should be true for an IM program. -- empathy needs to support OTR encryption https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/296867 You received this bug notification because you a

[Bug 296867] Re: empathy needs to support OTR encryption

2009-09-16 Thread Omnifarious
Not to mention that the proposed idea for implementing encryption over Jabber doesn't give the same level of privacy guarantees as OTR, nor is it actually as nice a standard in a lot of other ways. The average user will never generate an X.509 certificate for themselves. Anything based on that ki

[Bug 296867] Re: empathy needs to support OTR encryption

2009-08-03 Thread Omnifarious
I will not use empathy until it has OTR support. It is worthless to me. I don't care if the maintainers think they can think of something better. Unless they can get it adopted by other popular IM clients, I want OTR. And it's not better unless it also has the deniability that OTR provides. --

[Bug 52529] Re: Please backport mercurial 0.9

2008-04-21 Thread Omnifarious
Well, I would answer, but I know nothing of the Debian package management system or what debhelper is even for. -- Please backport mercurial 0.9 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/52529 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ub

[Bug 58376] Re: Ethereal is old and dangerously buggy, update to wireshark

2007-05-02 Thread Omnifarious
This bug is pointless. If it takes over 6 months to solve a security issue with a current distribution (that 6 months later is now out of date, as might be expected) then I'm not going to be using Ubuntu or recommending it to anybody I know. I'm sorry, but every experience I've had with reporting

[Bug 58376] Re: Ethereal is old and dangerously buggy, update to wireshark

2006-08-31 Thread Omnifarious
Rejecting this for Ubuntu as a whole because I believe it is only a problem in Dapper. ** Changed in: wireshark (Ubuntu) Status: Unconfirmed => Rejected -- Ethereal is old and dangerously buggy, update to wireshark https://launchpad.net/bugs/58376 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 58376] Ethereal is old and dangerously buggy, update to wireshark

2006-08-31 Thread Omnifarious
Public bug reported: Binary package hint: ethereal This package should be removed from dapper and wireshark put in its place. Ethereal has several security problems reported against it that are now fixed in Wireshark. http://www.wireshark.org/ It clearly states on that page that ethereal has c

[Bug 54715] Re: please remove ethereal from the archive (replaced by wireshark)

2006-08-08 Thread Omnifarious
If wireshark isn't in the Ubuntu archive, it should be. Ethereal is now old, and currently has major security issues. See http://www.wireshark.org/ -- please remove ethereal from the archive (replaced by wireshark) https://launchpad.net/bugs/54715 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists

[Bug 52529] Re: Please backport mercurial 0.9

2006-08-04 Thread Omnifarious
And now, of course, Mercurial is up to 0.9.1 as of July 24th. -- Please backport mercurial 0.9 https://launchpad.net/bugs/52529 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 52529] Re: Please backport mercurial 0.9

2006-08-04 Thread Omnifarious
** Bug 55196 has been marked a duplicate of this bug -- Please backport mercurial 0.9 https://launchpad.net/bugs/52529 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 55196] Re: Ubuntu version of this is way old

2006-08-04 Thread Omnifarious
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 52529 *** ** This bug has been marked a duplicate of bug 52529 Please backport mercurial 0.9 -- Ubuntu version of this is way old https://launchpad.net/bugs/55196 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/lis

[Bug 49261] Re: Backport a more recent version to dapper-updates

2006-08-04 Thread Omnifarious
0.9.1 was release on July 24th. -- Backport a more recent version to dapper-updates https://launchpad.net/bugs/49261 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 55196] Ubuntu version of this is way old

2006-08-04 Thread Omnifarious
*** This bug is a duplicate of bug 52529 *** Public bug reported: Binary package hint: mercurial 0.7 is an ancient release of Mercurial. 0.8 was released in January, and the most recent release was 0.9.1 on July 24, 2006. There have been significant enhancements to Mercurial since 0.7. ** Aff