lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 13 Jan 2005 12:10:33 -0800 (PST)
FromLinus Torvalds <>
SubjectRe: thoughts on kernel security issues
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005, Dave Jones wrote:
> > When issues get leaked, the incentive for a researcher to use the
> same process again goes away, which hurts us.  Basically, trying
> to keep them happy is in our best interests.

Not so.

_balancing_ their happiness with our needs is what's in our best
interests. Yes, we should encourage them to tell us, but totally bending
over backwards is definitely the wrong thing to do.

In fact, right now we seem to encourage even people who do _not_
necessarily want the delay and secrecy to go over to vendor-sec, just
because the vendor-sec people are clearly arguing even against
alternatives.

Which is something I do not understand. The _apologia_ for vendor-sec is 
absolutely stunning. Even if there are people who want to only interface 
with a fascist vendor-sec-style absolute secrecy list, THAT IS NOT AN 
EXCUSE TO NOT HAVE OPEN LISTS IN _ADDITION_!

In other words, I really don't understand this total subjugation by people 
to the vendor-sec mentaliy. It's a disease, I tell you.

			Linus
-
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 13:09    [from the cache]
©2003-2008