Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-188906-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 17:59:34 +0200
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-35906: drm/amd/display: Send DTBCLK disable message on
 first commit
Message-ID: <ZlC5ZooIRyVb9ITu@tiehlicka>
References: <ZkzREEA5_N_xfqED@tiehlicka>
 <2024052110-grasp-liking-22c0@gregkh>
 <ZkzgZoxF_RD50PdW@tiehlicka>
 <2024052243-napping-coastal-3306@gregkh>
 <Zk790Afi1sfwgrZi@tiehlicka>
 <2024052309-scabby-favored-0973@gregkh>
 <ZlBnsEsr66mR-frf@tiehlicka>
 <2024052458-matrimony-making-b7f1@gregkh>
 <ZlCd6kD4w2mezWBj@tiehlicka>
 <2024052453-afar-tartly-3721@gregkh>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2024052453-afar-tartly-3721@gregkh>

On Fri 24-05-24 17:22:24, Greg KH wrote:
[...]
> > > And people want to word-smith the text all the time already, so we just
> > > default to using the changelog text as that's the most "neutral" and
> > > public information out there (i.e. we don't have to worry about any sort
> > > of data-retention or classification laws as the information is already
> > > public in kernel changelog text.)
> > 
> > This part I do not understand. What is wrong about a reasoning why
> > something has been considered a CVE? E.g. something like 
> > CVE assigned because a potential WARN_ON is fixed and that could panic
> > with panic_on_warn. Fixed by <URL_TO_LINUS_TREE>
> > 
> > or
> > CVE assigned because UAF is fixed and those can be generally used to
> > construct more complex attacks. Fixed by <URL_TO_LINUS_TREE>
> > 
> > etc.
> 
> Doing the work to classify all of these in this manner isn't going to
> happen by us, sorry, as it is not required by the CVE process, and
> frankly, we are doing a load of work already here.

I would really like the understand this position. You are doing the
classification already, right? What does prevent you from making that a
part of the process? Why wouldn't you like to help CVE consumers to
understand that process better?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs