He posted to security out of an abundance of caution, but it's hard to see how this could be a significant security issue. Feels unfair to punish him for being

He posted to security out of an abundance of caution, but it's hard to see how this could be a significant security issue. Feels unfair to punish him for being considerate here. Also kernel workflows are not intuitive. I don't have any idea what signed-off-by is or how to get it. Don't you post to the list? What else would you do? Would it have been better for Miculas to spend time researching kernel workflows while this "security issue" remained unpatched? Feels like there's not really a way for him to win here. > original patch was both technically unacceptable to the maintainer and not cleared for inclusion in the kernel (no Signed-off-by) Crediting as a co-author is a good compromise here, I would say.