netdev - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 09/26] net/mlx5e: Init ethtool steering for representors

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: <4a5bc4cf3225682e3d79590eeec1ae81774e3c2a.camel@mellanox.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:11:38 +0000
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To:     "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "sashal@...nel.org" <sashal@...nel.org>,
        "ecree@...arflare.com" <ecree@...arflare.com>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "gerlitz.or@...il.com" <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 09/26] net/mlx5e: Init ethtool steering for
 representors

On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 13:08 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 19:31:25 +0000 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > > IMHO it doesn't make any sense to take into stable
> > > > automatically
> > > > any patch that doesn't have fixes line. Do you have 1/2/3/4/5
> > > > concrete
> > > > examples from your (referring to your Microsoft employee hat
> > > > comment
> > > > below) or other's people production environment where patches
> > > > proved to
> > > > be necessary but they lacked the fixes tag - would love to see
> > > > them.  
> > > 
> > > Oh wow, where do you want me to start.  I have zillions of these.
> > > 
> > > But wait, don't trust me, trust a 3rd party.  Here's what
> > > Google's
> > > security team said about the last 9 months of 2019:
> > > 	- 209 known vulnerabilities patched in LTS kernels, most
> > > without
> > > 	  CVEs
> > > 	- 950+ criticial non-security bugs fixes for device XXXX alone
> > > 	  with LTS releases
> > 
> > So opt-in for these critical or _always_ in use basic kernel
> > sections.
> > but make the default opt-out.. 
> 
> But the less attentive/weaker the maintainers the more benefit from
> autosel they get. The default has to be correct for the group which 
> is more likely to take no action.

or the more exposed they are to false positives :), unnoticed bugs due
to wrong patches getting backported.. this could go for years for less
attentive weaker modules, until someone steps on it.