4 ms·
Partly they already have enough on their plate. It's up to the reporter to pick how to handle the disclosure, and unless a specific maintainer chooses to handle
by bonzini 6mo ago
Partly they already have enough on their plate. It's up to the reporter to pick how to handle the disclosure, and unless a specific maintainer chooses to handle it, the Linux security team clearly says they won't.
Partly they have a strong belief that all kernel bugs are vulnerabilities and all vulnerabilities are just bugs; sometimes taken to the extreme in both ways (on one hand this case where the vulnerability is almost ignored; on the other hand, I saw cases where a VM panic that could be triggered only by a misbehaving host—which could just choose to stop executing the VM—was given a CVE).
- baggy_trough 6mo agoSeems a little crazy. Somebody should evaluate blast radius and do appropriate distro notifications in a case like this (I presume the impact was part of the disclosure, so not much extra work).
- seanhunter 6mo agoYou know the linux kernel is a free software project right? If you think “somebody should” do a thing but you aren’t prepared to do it yourself then you should maybe ask for a full refund.
- baggy_trough 6mo agoThank you very much, seanhunter. You hit the nail on the head there.
- bonzini 6mo agoNot really, because they made Linux a CNA specifically to own the process and distort it the way they want it to be.
- staticassertion 6mo agoThis couldn't be more backwards. This has literally nothing to do with bandwidth. The kernel is a CNA, they are explicitly the ones to do this. The reason they don't is because Linus and Greg have repeatedly, publicly stated that they don't want to because they don't believe that vulnerabilities conceptually make sense for the linux kernel and they refuse to engage in the process.
- bonzini 6mo ago> they don't believe that vulnerabilities conceptually make sense That's exactly what I wrote: "they have a strong belief that all kernel bugs are vulnerabilities and all vulnerabilities are just bugs; sometimes taken to the extreme in both ways". But there is also a question of bandwidth. If a maintainer asks to bring a specific vulnerability to distros-list, the kernel security people will be reasonable. I did it last March.
- nickitolas 6mo agoHow does that square with this comment from greg from today? https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/01/3 https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/01/3 (About heads up to distros) > Nope, sorry, we are NOT allowed to notify anyone about anything "ahead of time" otherwise we will have to tell everyone about everything. That's the only policy by which all the legal/governmental agencies have agreed to allow us to operate in, so we are stuck with it.
- staticassertion 6mo agoHe's full of shit lol
- bonzini 6mo agoI don't know, this is the one that I mentioned: https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/03/30/5 https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/03/30/5 You can see my name under "Timeline", I asked kindly for both distros-list and a longer embargo than usual and got them. I guess Greg is not allowed to notify distros-list, but someone else is?