Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:18:14 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>, akpm@osdl.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
       marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: thoughts on kernel security issues
Message-ID: <20050112191814.GA11042@kroah.com>
References: <20050112094807.K24171@build.pdx.osdl.net> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501121002200.2310@ppc970.osdl.org> <20050112185133.GA10687@kroah.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501121058120.2310@ppc970.osdl.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501121058120.2310@ppc970.osdl.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1220
Lines: 31

On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 11:01:42AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Greg KH wrote:
> > 
> > So you would be for a closed list, but there would be no incentive at
> > all for anyone on the list to keep the contents of what was posted to
> > the list closed at any time?  That goes against the above stated goal of
> > complying with RFPolicy.
> 
> There's already vendor-sec. I assume they follow RFPolicy already. If it's 
> just another vendor-sec, why would you put up a new list for it?

I think the issue is that there is no main "security" contact for the
kernel.  If we want to make vendor-sec that contact, fine, but we better
warn the vendor-sec people :)

> In other words, if you allow embargoes and vendor politics, what would the 
> new list buy that isn't already in vendor-sec.

vendor-sec handles a lot of other stuff that is not kernel related
(every package that is in a distro.) This would only be for the kernel.

thanks,

greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/