Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:48:58 +0800
From: Greg KH <>
Subject: Re: handling of Linux kernel vulnerabilities (was:
 CVE request - Linux kernel: VFAT slab-based buffer overflow)

On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 10:39:30PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> I was getting encouraged by the recent anger-centric posts, the "what
> is it that we're supposed to do better?" ones. That gave me some
> encouragement that there was the possibility of positive change, but
> the "we're not going to make users more unsafe by telling them about
> issues affecting them" is a persistence of the denial state.  That
> logic completely violates the known idiom that knowledge is power:
> give users the knowledge that they need to protect themselves, and
> they will; starve them of that knowledge, and they remain vulnerable.

That's a load of crap.

Seriously, you know it only benefits the "bad guys" if I were to say,
"This patch just went into Linus's tree that fixes a security problem
that you can exploit in this manner".  No user would have a chance to
fix their systems before the vulnerability was added to the
"ultra-sploit" tool and everyone would have their systems trashed.

If you so strongly believe this, why is there a linux-distros list in
the first place?

Come on, be realistic people.

greg k-h

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.