[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <874ipiywpd.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2025 15:32:14 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Security Officers <security@...nel.org>, kees@...nel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: insist on the plain-text requirement for
security reports
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 03:17:41PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>> As the trend of AI-generated reports is growing, the trend of unreadable
>> reports in gimmicky formats is following, and we cannot request that
>> developers rely on online viewers to be able to read a security report
>> full for formatting tags. Let's just insist on the plain text requirement
>> a bit more.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
>> ---
>> Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 6 +++++-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Looks good to me! Given the number of non-plain-text emails with binary
> attachments we still get there, it's obvious not many people seem to
> read this file, but it can't hurt! :)
>
> I'll queue this up if Jon doesn't, after -rc1 is out. If he wants to
> take it, here's my:
>
> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
I grabbed it, thanks.
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists