linux-kernel - Re: [stable] Linux 2.6.25.10

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:	Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	pageexec@...email.hu
Cc:	tiago@...umpcao.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, greg@...ah.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] Linux 2.6.25.10

From: pageexec@...email.hu
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:23:50 +0200

> On 16 Jul 2008 at 3:08, David Miller wrote:
> 
> > IOW, when we fix security issues, it's simply not even appropriate or 
> > relevant to you.
> 
> i'll ask again: why aren't security fixes that you fix relevant to users
> of older kernels (as that's what the topic was)?

Backporting any fix to older kernels is a chore, the further back you
go, the harder and less fun it is.

The tipping point is really quick to where someone hacking the kernel
for fun simply isn't going to do it, nor should they be expected to.

That's why people who want a stable supported kernel with fixes
constantly backported have grown accustomed to paying for that service.

And to me that is entirely reasonable.
--
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/