Gentoo Archives: gentoo-security

From: Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o>
To: gentoo-security@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-security] Kernels and GLSAs
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:56:19
Message-Id: 200509201950.40901.carlo@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-security] Kernels and GLSAs by Thierry Carrez
1 On Tuesday 20 September 2005 18:15, Thierry Carrez wrote:
2 > Carsten Lohrke wrote:
3 > > This is indeed a problem. But the user expects a single point of
4 > > information about vulnerabilities from a distribution - and he's
5 > > absolutely right to do so.
6 >
7 > No, the user expects a single information channel. If we release Kernel
8 > alerts (GLKAs) in the same media as GLSAs (gentoo-announce, forums and
9 > RSS feed) he will get both. We can even name them "GLSAs" if that makes
10 > you feel better. They just won't have the same contents and won't be
11 > used by the same tools (see my explanation about glsa-check dealing with
12 > installed packages rather than with currently used kernel).
13
14 I think you got me wrong here, I meant absolutely the same as you. The point
15 is I never saw any GLKA and no GLSA regarding kernel issues for quite a while
16 and while I do not follow the kernel development closely and kiss.gentoo.org
17 results in 404 since some time, I'm pretty sure there is quite a number of
18 open vulnerabilities - at least in the latest stable 2.4.x kernel.
19
20 > Thing is, we can't fix all kernel issues in time for *any* source. By
21 > listing vulnerabilities rather than fixes, we :
22
23 What's the reason? The kernel is of course a bit more critical than Does the
24 kernel herd need more time fixing and testing, do the arch herds need more
25 time testing, lack of man power?
26
27
28 Carsten