Re: [RFC] Mark of upstream CVE patches

Burton, Ross
2015-12-16T09:21:48Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 806 bytes --]

On 16 December 2015 at 09:03, Sona Sarmadi <sona.sarmadi@enea.com> wrote:

> We are supposed to have reference to the CVE identifier both in the patch
> file/s
> and the commit message(e.g. xxx- CVE-2013-6435.pacth) according to the
> guidelines
> for "Patch name convention and commit message" in the Yocto
> Wiki https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Security.
>
> If a patch address multiple CVEs, perhaps we should name the patch:
> Fix-for-multiple-CVEs.patch and list all CVEs in the patch file.
>
> Will this not solve the problem? Do you think there is still need for a
> new tag "CVE"?
>

I'd say a new tag is essential if we want to automate tooling, to reduce
the chance of false-positives from simply searching the patch for something
that looks like a CVE reference.

Ross

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1334 bytes --]