From: agustin.benito@codethink.co.uk (Agustin Benito Bethencourt)
To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org
Subject: [cip-dev] Maintenance policies and early considerations III
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 14:56:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57E3D4EC.2080008@codethink.co.uk> (raw)
Hi,
the below considerations were discussed during the Members meeting.
There is no conclusion yet about how to proceed.
++ Security fixes
+++ Out-of-tree drivers
The embedded systems that CIP will be used in will also often require
out-of-tree drivers and will sometimes include other changes of unknown
quality to their kernel. It needs to be made clear to members that
these modifications are unsupported, and that when they want the CIP
core team to address a bug found in such a modified kernel they must
first demonstrate that it exists in the CIP source release.
+++ Security updates
Commercial Linux based distributions like RHEL/SLE typically has
security updates available for the most serious issues (such as
privilege escalation) within a few days of them being publicly known, if
not on the first day.
CIP may be able to achieve this with its source releases but its members
may take much longer to release and deploy binary updates, maybe due to
valid concerns about the risk of regression or limited opportunities to
deploy updates. In the worst case, they may use CIP as an
advertising/compliance point but rarely bother to update. For this
reason Ben H. thinks it's important to draw on the work of the Kernel
Self-Protection Project to add mitigations against common types of
vulnerability. That work is slowly filtering into mainline and at least
some of it could be backported.
+++ Request to members from maintainer
During the meeting Ben requested CIP members to provide him some
guidelines or policies currently followed to choose security patches.
This information will hopefully provide some light that help maintainers
to define some basic policies for choosing security fixes. This policies
need to be tested over time.
Due to the length of the maintenance period, it is unlikely that the
same person/team maintain the kernel for the entire life cycle so the
main policies at least need to be left written.
Best Regards
--
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
next reply other threads:[~2016-09-22 12:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-22 12:56 Agustin Benito Bethencourt [this message]
2016-09-30 1:05 ` [cip-dev] Maintenance policies and early considerations III Daniel Sangorrin
2016-10-27 6:42 ` Hidehiro Kawai
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=57E3D4EC.2080008@codethink.co.uk \
--to=agustin.benito@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox