[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EF12420.6070605@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:11:12 -0700
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@...hat.com>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: CVE assignment from previous years
On 12/20/2011 11:07 AM, Steven M. Christey wrote:
>
> Note that the year does NOT include when the vuln was found (and if it
> was silently fixed, that's not a factor either).
>
> The year is almost always obtained from either:
>
> 1) When the CVE was first privately reserved. We already have more than
> two hundred CVE-2012-XXXX numbers reserved for various CNAs who are
> using them to coordinate disclosures that are scheduled to
> happen in 2012. This date often correlates with the year that the
> vuln
> was found, but not always.
>
> 2) When the issue was first made public. There can be some disagreement
> about when a vuln is first published (e.g. a bug report may lie
> unresolved, technically viewable by anybody, for a few years before it
> reaches general awareness, or something might be published on December
> 31 in one part of the world when it is January 1 in another part of
> the
> world.)
>
> Some CNAs who have a pool of CVEs from one year, will continue to use
> that pool in the next year if there are any CVEs left over, though I
> generally discourage it.
>
> In January and February 2012, you will probably still see a fairly
> large number of new CVE-2011-xxxx identifiers released, as MITRE/etc.
> assign CVEs to issues that were first published in 2011.
>
> - Steve
>
Steven is correct and I was wrong (as usual =) Please ignore what I
said previously.
--
-Kurt Seifried / Red Hat Security Response Team
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
