Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] KS Topic request: Handling the Stable kernel, let's dump the cc: stable tag

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 04:53:58AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 09:36 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:11:24AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Greg KH wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Anything that's being reviewed on the stable list is public.  I know
> > > > > this is an old argument, but if you point out a fix you *know* has a
> > > > > security impact then you'll help general distribution maintainers and
> > > > > users a lot more than you help the black-hats who are quite capable of
> > > > > recognising such a fix (if they haven't already spotted and exploited
> > > > > the bug).
> > > > 
> > > > I'm sorry, but you know I will not do that, so asking about it isn't
> > > > going to change this behavior.
> > > 
> > > I just followed up in the other thread, where Ted was explaining why the 
> > > huge /dev/random rework was a -stable material.
> > > 
> > > Why specifically would it be wrong to be open about this being security 
> > > related, and providing the necessary data (i.e. at least reference to 
> > > http://factorable.net/) publically?
> > > 
> > > I fail to see what the point behind hiding this would be.
> > 
> > I'm not "hiding" anything, all I'm doing is using the exact same
> > changelog comments that are in Linus's tree, and nothing else.
> 
> Right, and I wouldn't expect you to edit commit messages.  But if a fix
> was privately proposed to you for stable on the grounds that the bug is
> found to be exploitable, maybe you could include that information in the
> cover message for the review.

Sorry, my position on that has not changed, I will not do that for the
obvious reasons discussed many times in the past.

greg k-h