From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933658AbcATHMT (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:12:19 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:51729 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751024AbcATHML (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:12:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 08:12:08 +0100 From: Marcus Meissner To: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com Cc: Josh Boyer , Peter Hurley , Dan Carpenter , "Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" Subject: Re: [kernel-hardening] Re: 2015 kernel CVEs Message-ID: <20160120071208.GA14085@suse.de> References: <20160119112812.GA10818@mwanda> <569E6ADC.2090306@hurleysoftware.com> <20160119175154.GA7485@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160119175154.GA7485@kroah.com> Organization: SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Felix_?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?Imend=F6rffer=2C_Jane_Smithard=2C_Graham_Norton=2C_HRB_212?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?84_=28AG_N=FCrnberg=29?= User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 09:51:54AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:00:57PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Peter Hurley 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... The question for CVE assignment is more if this bug existed in shipped kernel releases, not when it was fixed in relation to assignment. Ciao, Marcus