[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: thoughts on kernel security issues
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 03:36:27PM +0000, Alan Cox scribbled:
> On Mer, 2005-01-12 at 17:42, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > The kernel security list must be higher in hierarchy than vendorsec.
> >
> > Any information sent to vendorsec must be sent immediately for the kernel
> > security list and discussed there.
> We cannot do this without the reporters permission. Often we get
I think I don't understand that. A reporter doesn't "own" the bug - not the
copyright, not the code, so how come they can own the fix/report?

> material that even the list isn't allowed to directly see only by
> contacting the relevant bodies directly as well. The list then just
> serves as a "foo should have told you about issue X" notification.
This sounds crazy. I understand that this may happen with proprietary
software, or software that is made/supported by a company but otherwise opensource
(like OpenOffice, for instance), but the kernel?


[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.185 / U:7.388 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site