From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67DAC001B3 for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2023 19:26:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230004AbjGCT0g (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2023 15:26:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47488 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229517AbjGCT0f (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Jul 2023 15:26:35 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62c.google.com (mail-pl1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09457E5D for ; Mon, 3 Jul 2023 12:26:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1b7f223994fso37681885ad.3 for ; Mon, 03 Jul 2023 12:26:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; t=1688412393; x=1691004393; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=J3p3eNAqggHvOy+dCovJCM+vn6jIvZSGl56iQugvFzQ=; b=JvOj5N/tPXqoXKZPklVGbU+WslPQ4ST7IRwV4EWSHBeAoe7yIXnwvdtwDouc4KfQBt 5VkiccR26A0nCpCw6fRstWwArbXQTvcpYBOlLjx/Y7iMYGFskit08QSXc3HHIWF61EHy tTAFyr4T1VWyQ07Fk5oaGETFhJfstluuBzMAM= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1688412393; x=1691004393; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=J3p3eNAqggHvOy+dCovJCM+vn6jIvZSGl56iQugvFzQ=; b=lIMEYHYzAgBz2dVj4JBYxEcg5JHikwqo6QRH/Hq+0K3Zn0Sb/iSiUEay4mrbUzOjXZ wSyiDBqsbb931mpQdaqIVp5iXFblhql+KRs3/OFAZ1VMmBVewIS/uUDZFAfrt2lQEGMP sgu06vfU0tYA4AEbHxK6UMuX4Po2GN7ApsWZAmTwk2dCpnSWRTaX80xodG0jWiWKOXli 5Bp17/3CZ+uh0XNznVBRZKVILKzVjEtEKEPHPrYIydHwLmV5PyKiYpzvKqp4dmbriPQX lHcUP7CQNxSiBGMSpPIbUNResgOusPnvu17Xv2jE3bavnIGP4CoxfnukNVkYedzWvY/W TrhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABy/qLYaUuoiXy39yB/pw0uJUYUKF7a0/PqHsKF0bs+4sI0mmJ54brYR zVQzTfhDfNqHmCDu6rmYMZjmDg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APBJJlHmrCzeQOAdjx4aI0PP0e2RYfB1YXwITINUWE+FnGDO4EGqON8269xwvJS2l16nH2QEYoyTRg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:cecb:b0:1b8:715:210 with SMTP id d11-20020a170902cecb00b001b807150210mr13913361plg.34.1688412393503; Mon, 03 Jul 2023 12:26:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (198-0-35-241-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [198.0.35.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id jl3-20020a170903134300b001ac6b926621sm15597702plb.292.2023.07.03.12.26.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 03 Jul 2023 12:26:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2023 12:26:32 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Willy Tarreau , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, security@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, workflows@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: security-bugs.rst: clarify CVE handling Message-ID: <202307031217.95B8803@keescook> References: <2023063020-throat-pantyhose-f110@gregkh> <2023063022-retouch-kerosene-7e4a@gregkh> <202306301114.E199B136@keescook> <2023070213-capacity-moneybags-3668@gregkh> <2023070335-groggily-catfish-9ad5@gregkh> <202307031131.51907BC65@keescook> <2023070329-mangy-dipping-2ebd@gregkh> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2023070329-mangy-dipping-2ebd@gregkh> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:05:15PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 11:35:37AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 05:00:15PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 06:08:00AM +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > > The security team does not assign CVEs, nor do we require them for > > > > reports or fixes, as this can needlessly complicate the process and may > > > > delay the bug handling. If a reporter wishes to have a CVE identifier > > > > assigned, they should find one by themselves, for example by contacting > > > > MITRE directly. However under no circumstances will a patch inclusion > > > > be delayed to wait for a CVE identifier to arrive. > > > > > > > > This puts the responsibility for finding one in time on the reporter > > > > depending on what they expect, and if they want it in the commit > > > > message, they'd rather have one before reporting the problem. > > > > > > Oh, nice wording, let me steal that! :) > > > > Yeah, this is good. The last sentence is a little hard to parse, so how > > about this, with a little more rationale expansion: > > > > However under no circumstances will patch publication be delayed for > > CVE identifier assignment. Getting fixes landed takes precedence; the > > CVE database entry will already reference the commit, so there is no loss > > of information if the CVE is assigned later. > > "simple is better" should be the key here, reading a wall of text is > hard for people, so let me just keep the one new sentance that Willy > proposed and if people still struggle with the whole CVEs and > security@k.o mess in the future, we can revise it again. > > Also, there is not really a "CVE database", I think that's what NVD from > NIST does and CNNVD from China does, and "Something to be named in the > future soon" will do for the EU. There is a "CVE List" at cve.org, but > that thing is always out of date, and for all of this I don't want to > have to try to explain it in our document as that's nothing we want to > mess with :) Okay, fair, though please include something about it in the commit log so that other folks with concerns similar to Mathias Krause's will be answered: https://infosec.exchange/@minipli/110632971830936754 I still think this version of the sentence is more readable: However under no circumstances will patch publication be delayed for CVE identifier assignment. "patch inclusion" is less clear to me that "publication", and "be delayed to wait for" is redundant: a delay is a wait, and "to arrive" is just the assignment, which is the subject of the paragraph, so better to keep the language for that consistent. -Kees -- Kees Cook