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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2c4f2031-db2d-92c4-5476-dfd813f93d50@leemhuis.info>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 18:02:36 +0200
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
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 18.07.23 17:37, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> 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

BTW: I wonder if "reported to them" should be removed. Or maybe it
should be "they become aware of" instead, as they might be reported to
of the the contributors to the subsystem the maintainer handles. Not
sure. Currently I think removing might be better. Judge yourself.

>> 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!

+1

> 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.

I don't really care, but that could be avoided with something like
"security vulnerabilities known to be exploitable".

Cioa, Thorsten

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ