Home page logo

oss-sec logo oss-sec mailing list archives

Re: handling of Linux kernel vulnerabilities (was: CVE request - Linux kernel: VFAT slab-based buffer overflow)
From: Greg KH <greg () kroah com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:52:54 +0800

On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 06:57:23AM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:

Note that I am not even asking you to reconsider.  I have little hope
that you would, as you appeared to have a firm opinion on this.
I merely mentioned this aspect, with no intent to prompt a discussion of
it.  That said, I've commented inline, just to clear up your confusion.

Thanks for doing this.

You bring up a bunch of issues that
the distros need to consider, what can the Linux kernel security team do

Post to oss-security on commit day.

You know why we will not do that, sorry.

Optionally, also notify linux-distros a few days before the commit.

We don't usually have "days" before things are committed.  We find out
about a problem, we make up a fix, and it is committed.  Usually all
within 1-2 days.  Sometimes things take longer to fix, but usually it's
prettty fast.

Overall, I think we should bite the bullet and accept sko's
notifications to linux-distros, with a grace period of up to 7 days.
Whenever a distro is ready to release an update, they should be able to
insist on doing so within another 1 day, even if the initially planned
grace period would expire later.  Would sko be OK with this?  Greg?

Again, I don't think anyone that is part of security () kernel org minds
about having the issues publicized, after linux-distro has their time
to get things fixed and to their users.  If the linux-distro people care
about that, that does not seem to be a security () kernel org group issue,

Right, but since you previously refused to notify oss-security right
away, I thought that you could possibly stipulate that you'd only keep
notifying linux-distros if the linux-distros folks keep the issues from
hitting oss-security for at least a certain amount of time, or at least
until fixes are available (from at least one distro? from all?), or
whatever.  If you're fine with letting linux-distros decide on this
fully on their own, and you would not stop notifying linux-distros if
you deem that they fully-disclose the issues publicly "too soon", that's
great (and logical)!

As far as I am concerned, I trust linux-distros to manage this in a sane
and proper manner, and they can notify the world when they decide to do
so.  If that trust is somehow broken, we can revisit the issue in the


greg k-h

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]