linux-kernel - Re: stable-security kernel updates

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: <5718B92B.3080105@oracle.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:27:39 -0400
From:	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
To:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, lwn@....net
Subject: Re: stable-security kernel updates

Hey Willy,

On 04/21/2016 03:11 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> This illustrates exactly what I suspected would happen because that's the
> same trouble we all face when picking backports for our respective trees
> except that since the selection barrier is much higher here, lots of
> important ones will be missing

Right. I fully agree that there will be important security commits that'll
get missed, whether because they were missed in the stable selection or
the stable-security selection.

I'd like to point out again that updating the entire stable tree is the
preferable way to patch against security (and non-security) issues. The
stable-security tree is a best-effort solution to provide a stop-gap in
between said stable tree updates.

Thanks,
Sasha