| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <48BD04B7.60702@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:17:43 +0800 From: Pavel Labushev <p.labushev@...il.com> To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk Subject: Re: Port Randomization: New revision of our IETF Internet-Draft Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu ?????: > On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 15:51:35 CDT, rholgstad said: >> Linus doesn't care about security > > No, he actually *does* care about security - he's just pf the opinion > that security fixes don't automatically rate a 'ZOMG! PWNED!' flag on > them like certain *BSD variants think. He thinks that sticking a big Linus is not a security expert. Not even close. He's not educated and not experienced enough to make security decisions, but he does. That's the problem. He cares somehow, but he's wrong. > SECURITY PATCH tag on a fix tends to make people cherry-pick and install > just those fixes - even though the patch they *didn't* install that > fixes a system crash or a silent data corruption is actually more critical. "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. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists