linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.25.6

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]

Message-ID: <20080610201218.GM4018@sequoia.sous-sol.org>
Date:	Tue, 10 Jun 2008 13:12:23 -0700
From:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.25.6

* markus reichelt (ml@...eichelt.de) wrote:
> * Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br> wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008, Chris Wright wrote:
> > > We (the -stable team) are announcing the release of the 2.6.25.6
> > > kernel.
> > > 
> > > It contains a number of assorted bugfixes all over the tree.  Users are
> > > encouraged to update.
> > 
> > It also contains at least one security bugfix, as some were quick
> > to point out in not-so-kind words:
> > 
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/285438/
> 
> I agree that security bugfixes should be pointed out more clearly.

I don't think anybody is disagreeing with that.  It's not always
obvious to bug submitters or fixers what the security implications are.
While Brad has a good point, esp. w.r.t. the specific cpufreq bug he
picked out having security implications, it is not true that we are
actively hiding security bugs.  Had I realized there was a security
issue, I would highlight it in the announce message.  In fact, that's
our standard procedure for -stable.

thanks,
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/