| 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: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807141924020.3017@woody.linux-foundation.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:27:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: pageexec@...email.hu cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org Subject: Re: [stable] Linux 2.6.25.10 On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, pageexec@...email.hu wrote: > > so guys (meaning not only Greg but Andrew, Linus, et al.), when will you > publicly explain why you're covering up security impact of bugs? and even > more importantly, when will you change your policy or bring your process > in line with what you declared? We went through this discussion a couple of weeks ago, and I had absolutely zero interest in explaining it again. I personally don't like embargoes. I don't think they work. That means that I want to fix things asap. But that also means that there is never a time when you can "let people know", except when it's not an issue any more, at which point there is no _point_ in letting people know any more. So I personally consider security bugs to be just "normal bugs". I don't cover them up, but I also don't have any reason what-so-ever to think it's a good idea to track them and announce them as something special. So there is no "policy". Nor is it likely to change. Linus -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists