[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160119175154.GA7485@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:54 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...oraproject.org>
Cc: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: 2015 kernel CVEs
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:00:57PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com> wrote:
> > On 01/19/2016 03:28 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >> I like to look back over old CVEs to see how we could do better. Here
> >> is the list from 2015. I got most of this information from the Ubuntu
> >> CVE tracker. Thanks Ubuntu!. If it doesn't have a hash that means it
> >> might not be fixed yet.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> CVE-2015-4170 cf872776fc84: tty: hang in tty
> >
> > Makes no sense that this was assigned a CVE.
> > I fixed this _2 yrs before_ it was reported and the patch was CC'd stable.
>
> I'm guessing the CVE was assigned because there are distributions that
> ship based on kernels earlier than 3.13. Those distributors need to
> verify if they have the fix, etc.
Yes, that's what happened here, Red Hat asked for it from what I
remember. I complained loudly on the oss-security list about it, but oh
well...
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
