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


On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Chris Wright wrote:
>
> Right, I know you don't like the embargo stuff.

I'd very happy with a "private" list in the sense that people wouldn't
feel pressured to fix it that day, and I think it makes sense to have some
policy where we don't necessarily make them public immediately in order to
give people the time to discuss them.

But it should be very clear that no entity (neither the reporter nor any
particular vendor/developer) can require silence, or ask for anything more
than "let's find the right solution". A purely _technical_ delay, in other
words, with no politics or other issues involved.

Otherwise it just becomes politics: you end up having security firms that
want a certain date because they want a PR blitz, and you end up having
vendors who want a certain date because they have release issues.

Does that mean that vendor-sec would end up being used for some things,
where people _want_ the politics and jockeying for position? Probably.
But having a purely technical alternative would be wonderful.

> > If that means that you can get only the list by invitation-only, that's
> > fine.
>
> Opinions on where to set it up? vger, osdl, ...?

I don't personally think it matters. Especially if we make it very clear
that it's purely technical, and no vendor politics can enter into it.
Whatever ends up being easiest.

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: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.162 / U:4.656 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site