full-disclosure - Re: Port Randomization: New revision of our IETF Internet-Draft

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:05:31 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: Pavel Labushev <p.labushev@...il.com>
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Port Randomization: New revision of our IETF
	Internet-Draft

On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:17:43 +0800, Pavel Labushev said:

> "SECURITY PATCH tag on a fix" helps me to know that there is the problem 
> and I must consider the patch, check its correctness and maybe 
> test/backport/apply it to my production systems ASAP. Just as another 
> tags helps me to know that there are realiability and other issues I 
> must care about.

OK, now s/security patch/silent data corruption/ and tell me what's *actually*
different.

Wow, you still need to consider it, check it, test it, and deploy it.

Unless of course you don't give a shit about your data.  But in that case,
the security patch can probably be overlooked too.

That's Linus's point - if the patch is important enough to go into one of
the -stable tree kernels, it's probably something you want to install, whether
or not it's a security patch.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/