linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] docs: stable-kernel-rules: explain use of stable@...nel.org (w/o @vger.)

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: <2024042957-revision-sublevel-57c2@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 09:51:05 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, workflows@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] docs: stable-kernel-rules: explain use of
 stable@...nel.org (w/o @vger.)

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 09:18:29AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Document when to use of stable@...nel.org instead of
> stable@...r.kernel.org, as the two are easily mixed up and their
> difference not explained anywhere[1].
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240422231550.3cf5f723@sal.lan/ [1]
> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
> ---
>  Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> index b4af627154f1d8..ebf4152659f2d0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@ for stable trees, add this tag in the sign-off area::
>  
>    Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>  
> +Use ``Cc: stable@...nel.org`` instead when fixing unpublished vulnerabilities:
> +it reduces the chance of accidentally exposing the fix to the public by way of
> +'git send-email', as mails sent to that address are not delivered anywhere.

The "fun" part of just saying this is that then it is a huge "signal" to
others that "hey, this might be a security fix!" when it lands in
Linus's tree.  But hey, we do what we can, I know my scripts always use
this address just to put a bit more noise into that signal :)

That being said, it's good to have this documented now, thanks for it:

Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>