![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 12:27:11PM -0800, Chris Wright wrote: > * Linus Torvalds (torvalds@osdl.org) wrote: > > But in the absense of politics, I'd _happily_ have a self-imposed embargo > > that is limited to some reasonable timeframe (and "reasonable" is > > definitely counted in days, not weeks. And absolutely _not_ in months, > > like apparently sometimes happens on vendor-sec). > > > > So if the embargo time starts ticking from _first_ report, I'd personally > > be perfectly happy with a policy of, say "5 working days" (aka one week), > > or until it was made public somewhere else. > > That's more or less my take. Timely response to reporter, timely > debugging/bug fixing and timely disclosure. That sounds sane to me too. > > IOW, if it was released on vendor-sec first, vendor-sec could _not_ then > > try to time the technical list (unless they do so in a very timely manner > > indeed). > > What about the reverse, and informing vendors? This is typical...project > security contact gets report, figures out bug, works with vendor-sec on > release date. In my experience, the long cycles rarely come from that > final negotiation. It's usually not much of a negotiation, rather a > "heads-up", "thanks". Vendors should also cc: the kernel-security list/contact at the same time they would normally contact vendor-sec. I don't see a problem with that happening, and would help out the people on vendor-sec from having to wade through a lot of linux kernel specific stuff at times. > The two goals: 1) timely response, fix, dislosure; and 2) not leaving > vendors with pants down; don't have to be mutually exclusive. I agree, having pants down when you don't want them to be isn't a good thing :) thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||