Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:18:13 -0700
From: Vincent Danen <vdanen@...sec.ca>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: charter - advisories

* [2008-02-25 01:26:00 +0300] Solar Designer wrote:

>On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 12:26:21PM -0700, Vincent Danen wrote:
>> Hmmm... maybe we should clarify the advisories we don't want to see.  I
>> guess advisories from, say, iDefense, would be valuable.  But advisories
>> from Mandriva or SUSE not so much.
>> 
>> Maybe we should indicate no *vendor* advisories,
>
>I think this is pretty much what we did already.  From the charter:
>
>Security advisories aimed at end-users only are not welcome (e.g., those
>from a distribution vendor announcing new pre-built packages).  There has
>to be desirable information for others in the Open Source community
>(e.g., an upstream maintainer may announce a new version of their
>software with security fixes to be picked up by distributors).
>
>If you can word this better, please go ahead and edit it on the wiki.

No, that sounds fine to me, but I don't think it was there when I
initially replied (or at least, not when I had looked at it last prior
to that reply).

>> and make a second list specifically for that?
>
>I'd be happy to make such a list if there's demand - is there?  Let me
>address this question to those vendors (represented in here) who
>currently copy their advisories to Bugtraq - will you start sending them
>to this new special-purpose list?  If so, will you discontinue sending
>them to Bugtraq, suggesting that whoever wants to receive all-vendor
>advisories should subscribe the new special-purpose list?  I think this
>could help us reclaim Bugtraq as a general security discussion list.

For Mandriva, I can say yes.  We currently send to bugtraq, FD, our own
announcements list (which includes the bugfix advisories, and would
likely remain the only source of bugfix/enhancement advisory
notification), and I believe to CERT.  We would drop the sending to
bugtraq and FD if such a list existed.

>Note that Bugtraq will remain quite different from oss-security even if
>reclaimed as a discussion list.  oss-security is for people involved
>with OSS projects (although others are welcome to listen to our
>conversations) and for detailed discussions of source code patches, etc.
>when that is needed.  Bugtraq is for everyone, including end-users and
>closed-source folks - and it is large-scale, meaning that discussions of
>individual issues should not run for too long and get into minor detail.

I don't think there is currently anything with the same goals/content as
what we'll be seeing on oss-security.

>Also, a question to those vendors (represented in here) who don't copy
>their advisories to Bugtraq currently (too shy or polite) - will you
>start sending them to this new special-purpose list?

With my Annvix vendor hat on, I'd say no, but it's largely due to the
small userbase and my not wanting to expend needless energy on writing
advisories (for the Annvix userbase, the changelogs are sufficient).

-- 
Vincent Danen @ http://linsec.ca/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

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.