[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: thoughts on kernel security issues

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> That sounds a bit over-the-top to me, sorry.

Maybe a bit pointed, but the question is: would a user perhaps want to
know about a security fix a month earlier (knowing that bad people might
guess at it too), or want the security fix a month later (knowing that the
bad guys may well have known about the problem all the time _anyway_)?

Being public is different from being known about. If vendor-sec knows
about it, I don't find it at all unbelievable that some spam-virus writer
might know about it too.

> All of these are of exactly the same severity as the rlimit bug,
> and nobody cares, nobody is hurt.

The fact is, 99% of the time, nobody really does care.

> The fuss over the rlimit problem occurred simply because some external
> organisation chose to make a fuss over it.

I agree. And if i thad been out in the open all the time, the fuss simply
would not have been there.

I'm a big believer in _total_ openness. Accept the fact that bugs will
happen. Be open about them, and fix them as soon as possible. None of this
cloak-and-dagger stuff.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.223 / U:1.960 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site