[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:0.021 / U:8.408 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site