![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Linus Torvalds: > So I think the whole vendor-sec thing is not helping users at all, it's > purely a "vendor embarassment" thing. At least vendor-sec serves as a candidate naming authority for CVE, and makes sure that the distributors use the same set of CANs in their advisories. For users, this is an important step forward, because there is no other way to tell if vendor A is fixing the same problem as vendor B, at least for end users. In the past, the kernel developers (including you) supported the vendor-sec process by not addressing security issues in official kernels in a timely manner, and (what's far worse from a user point of view) silently fixing security bugs in new releases, probably because some vendor kernels weren't fixed yet. Especially the last point doesn't help users. - 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 | |||||||||||