Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:58:30 -0700
From: Mats Wichmann <>
Subject: Re: MITRE is adding data intake to its CVE ID process

On 02/10/2017 04:39 PM, Williams, Ken wrote:
> Tim,
> Your perception is incorrect.  I can assure you there is no 
> CVE-related bias whatsoever towards commercial software, or against 
> OSS.  Never has been any CVE-related bias against OSS, and I can't 
> imagine there ever will be.
> I'm a big OSS fan and advocate, and although I will only speak for 
> myself, I'd be willing to bet that everybody else involved with the 
> CVE project is too.
> As far as sending copies of CVE web form submissions to oss-sec, or 
> posting anywhere else, keep in mind that much of that info needs to 
> be embargoed until a vendor security advisory is published.
> Regards,
> Ken Williams
> Disclaimer: I've been on the CVE Board for 17 years.

It's hard to see how this change doesn't completely cut the legs out
from under this list... for those things which were sent here, and thus
subject to discussion on the list (a lot of which in my simplistic world
view has often been very useful), now in order to get any attention it
has to go to a web form, and those submissions are immediately caught in
the "embargo" net, and thus won't come here at all.  Am I
misunderstanding this completely?

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.