linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2402162247380.21798@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 22:51:16 +0100 (CET)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, 
    Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, corbet@....net, 
    workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
    linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, security@...nel.org, linux@...mhuis.info, 
    Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, 
    Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>, 
    Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, 
    Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, 
    Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Documentation: Document the Linux Kernel CVE
 process

On Fri, 16 Feb 2024, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> My observation is that the old system has had pretty low-quality
> CVE's, and worse, overly inflated CVE Severity Scores, which has
> forced all people who are supporting distro and cloud serves which
> sell into the US Government market to have to do very fast releases to
> meet FedRAMP requirements.  At least once, I protested an overly
> inflated CVSS score as being completely b.s., at a particular
> enterprise distro bugzilla, and my opinion as the upstream developer
> was completely ignored.
> 
> So quite frankly, at least one enteprise distro hasn't impressed me

Sad to hear that, no matter which distro that was :), hoewer ... 

> with avoiding low quality CVE's and high CVSS scores, and so I'm quite
> willing to give the new system a chance.  (Especially since I've been
> told that the Linux Kernel CVE team isn't planning on issuing CVSS
> scores, which as far as I'm concerned, is *excellent* since my
> experience is that they are quite bogus, and quite arbitrary.)

.. how is this new process going to change anything in that respect? 

There will always be some entity assigning a CVSS score (apparently not 
the kernel.org/LTS group), and then odds are the situation you are 
describing will end up happening according exactly the same scenario, 
right?

I am still trying really hard to understand what exactly is the problem 
this whole effort is magically solving for everybody out there either 
using Linux, or producing something around/on-top-of Linux. And I still 
don't get it.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs