| 1 |
> On 15 Apr 2022, at 02:38, John Helmert III <ajak@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Hi all! Currently all security bugs are assigned to security@g.o, |
| 4 |
> always. This can easily lead to some confusion about who needs to do |
| 5 |
> something about a given bug; right now this is generally tracked by |
| 6 |
> whiteboard magic strings that probably not many people outside of the |
| 7 |
> Security Project understand [1] and this has been a source of |
| 8 |
> confusion around security bugs for a long time. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> To make it abundantly clear who needs to take action for a given bug, |
| 11 |
> I propose we move away from the dogma of security@ always being |
| 12 |
> assigned to security bugs, and instead assign bugs to whoever needs to |
| 13 |
> take action for the bug. For example, on security bugs that need a |
| 14 |
> package bumped or cleaned up, the package maintainer would be |
| 15 |
> assigned. For bugs needing a GLSA, security@ would be assigned. |
| 16 |
> [...] |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> What do you all think? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Yes, please. It's led to no end of confusion and had many requests |
| 22 |
for this over the years. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> [1] https://www.gentoo.org/support/security/vulnerability-treatment-policy.html "Severity Level" section |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Best, |
| 27 |
sam |
Archives