linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: Document the Linux Kernel CVE process

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: <2024021447-fastball-twilight-5389@gregkh>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 16:09:37 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
Cc: corbet@....net, workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, security@...nel.org,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: Document the Linux Kernel CVE process

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 03:38:52PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 
> > The people that make up the current team, Lee, Sasha, and I, have a LONG
> > history of fixing and triaging and managing security bugs for the
> > kernel, in the community and in corporate environments.  We know how to
> > do this as we have been doing it for decades already.  
> 
> Thanks for clarifying. Maybe the wording could use some more verbosity 
> then; one of my potential readings of it was "everything that gets picked 
> for -stable will get a CVE assigned".

CVE has a very specific definition already, as per cve.org:

	 CVE Record is the descriptive data about a vulnerability
	 associated with a CVE ID, provided by a CVE Numbering Authority
	 (CNA). This data is provided in multiple human and
	 machine-readable formats.

And they define "vulnerability" as:

	An instance of one or more weaknesses in a Product that can be
	exploited, causing a negative impact to confidentiality,
	integrity, or availability; a set of conditions or behaviors
	that allows the violation of an explicit or implicit security
	policy.

and as a CNA we must follow that definition.  No need to restate the CVE
rules in our own document, I am sure that if we don't follow them, lots
of people will be quick to point it out and we will revoke those ids
that we mess up on.

thanks,

greg k-h