public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>
Cc: "Mukund JB." <mukundjb@esntechnologies.co.in>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Which version of 2.6.11 is most stable
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 05:32:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051112043219.GV5376@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200511112149.08324.rob@landley.net>

On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 09:49:08PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> 
> One question I've wondered about for a bit...
> 
> The diff between each dot release (ala 2.6.12.0->2.6.12.1) can theoretically 
> be backported to an older kernel.  So in theory, at least some of the new 
> security fixes can be applied to older kernels.  (Yeah, this necessarily 
> complete.  Whether or not the patch makes any sense at all in the older 
> context, and whether or not that's everything they need to do...  That's a 
> seperate issue.  It allows some minimal, relatively straightforward 
> maintenance to be done on systems that are stuck with older kernels by 
> management fiat.
> 
> The gap is the jump to the next major release.  Suppose that 2.6.15 makes it 
> up to 2.6.15.10, and then 2.6.16 comes out.  Are there any security fixes in 
> 2.6.16 that weren't in 2.6.15.10?  Fixes which would have been in a 2.6.15.11 
> if the next big release had been delayed another two weeks?
> 
> From a practical standpoint, somebody stuck on 2.6.15 for another six months 
> is likely to at least try to apply the next security update (the diff between 
> 2.6.16->2.6.16.1) to their old kernel, but are they missing a week or two's 
> worth of security fixes?

They miss a completely undefined amount of fixes.
Consider e.g. the case that 2.6.16 contains fixes that are later 
identified as possible security issues.

The 2.6.16->2.6.16.1 patch fixes bugs in 2.6.16 - trying to apply it to 
a 2.6.15 kernel might both leave security holes and add new breakages.

> I'm trying to clarify what my question is:  When a new stable kernel comes 
> out, do the dot-release guys do one more release of security-only fixes to 
> patch all the known vulnerabilities that the new one addressed before moving 
> on?  Or do they just leave a gap and say "upgrade"?

There is no last dot-release - and it wouldn't help.

If you are running ftp.kernel.org kernels you have to upgrade to the 
latest one or you will definitely miss security fixes.

If this is a problem for you stay with distribution kernels - 
distributions offer exactly the service of security fixes for their 
kernels for a well-defined amount of time.

> Rob

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


  reply	other threads:[~2005-11-12  4:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-11-07 10:08 Which version of 2.6.11 is most stable Mukund JB.
2005-11-07 11:51 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-11-12  3:49   ` Rob Landley
2005-11-12  4:32     ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-07 13:08 Mukund JB.
2005-11-07 13:37 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi

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=20051112043219.GV5376@stusta.de \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mukundjb@esntechnologies.co.in \
    --cc=rob@landley.net \
    /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