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

Ben Hutchings
2013-07-17T03:53:58Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1590 bytes --]

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.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]