5 ms·
"Refusing" is a bit strong here. I agree this was a bug, but hardly a remote code exploit. The thread is very level headed and someone else filed the CVE. In t
by glennpratt 8y ago
"Refusing" is a bit strong here.
I agree this was a bug, but hardly a remote code exploit. The thread is very level headed and someone else filed the CVE. In the OSS community I run in this is normal, in fact I'd say it's very common for the primary developer to have a differing opinion about severity. But security doesn't depend on one bug ticket or one maintainer. There are many entities and teams at play that check and balance.
- inferiorhuman 8y ago"Refusing" is a bit strong here. How so? In your own words: someone else filed the CVE. Having someone else override Poettering does not mean "Pottering did not refuse". It simply means saner heads prevailed. You don't win a pwnie for high quality code, and the vulns they listed (as well as ones discovered subsequent to the award) all smack of low quality code. As the lead of a core piece of technology I expect more than childish whinging about how "CVEs aren't our currency". You like Pottering, great. I don't, and more to the point I don't like the results of his influence on Linux. When posed the question "why not switch to Linux now?" systemd is high on the list of reasons.
- glennpratt 8y agoI don't "like" Pottering because I don't know the person in the slightest. I have found systemd to be useful software and interactions on the issue queue have been reasonable. I was a happy Upstart user before Upstart threw in the towel too.
- glennpratt 8y agoAlso, thanks for the citation. I still strongly feel you've shown something that doesn't warrant a personal attack. As someone who gladly uses systemd while having no particular attachment to it, I find the aggressive and personal attacks confusing.
- glennpratt 8y agoI can't reply at your depth, but Apple and Google also appear to have won a "pwnie", whatever that is. I think think they still do respectable work in spite of it.