linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH docs] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small time maintainers

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:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 08:37:53 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" 
        <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Cc:     Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, corbet@....net,
        workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH docs] docs: maintainer: document expectations of small
 time maintainers

On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 12:31:02 +0200 Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) wrote:
> Maintainers must ensure severe problems in their code reported to them
> are resolved in a timely manner: security vulnerabilities, regressions,
> compilation errors, data loss, kernel crashes, and bugs of similar scope.

SG, thanks for the suggestion!

One edit - I'd like to remove "security vulnerabilities" from the list.
Security implications are an axis on which bug can be evaluated, one of
many. All kernel bugs have some security implications. Placing them as
a category like crashes, lockups or compiler errors could deepen the
confusion.