[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <12267.1220371531@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists