Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:39:10 -0700
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: pageexec@freemail.hu
Cc: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [stable] Linux 2.6.25.10
Message-ID: <20080715223910.GA6500@kroah.com>
References: <20080715183351.GF8185@mit.edu> <487D249C.19043.1BE04D4D@pageexec.freemail.hu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <487D249C.19043.1BE04D4D@pageexec.freemail.hu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1035
Lines: 27

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:28:44PM +0200, pageexec@freemail.hu wrote:
> Ted, the discussion is *not* about what the best disclosure policy
> would be for the kernel. the problem i raised was that there's one
> declared policy in Documentation/SecurityBugs (full disclosure) yet
> actual actions are completely different and now Linus even admitted
> it.

Huh?

How does what is described there differ from what Linus said, or the
-stable team has been doing so far?

What specifically are you asking for that is different?

The -stable commits are exactly the same as they are in mainline
(Linus's tree).  Are you upset by the fact that I am not saying, "Hey,
look, here's a bugfix that might be security related and here's how to
reproduce it!" in big flashing letters?

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/