On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 09:04:16PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 05:51:37PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> [cc list trimmed, security@ added] > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 07:35:57PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > But yes, having something "real" might be good if the load gets > >> >> > higher, > >> >> > right now it's so low that my "sweep pending security patches" task > >> >> > usually catches anything pending, which is rare. > >> >> > >> >> How does one get added to the security@ alias? We've been carrying > >> >> this patch in Fedora for a bit now. I'd be happy to help track things > >> >> given we get distro security bug reports and such. > >> > > >> > Just ask on the security@ alias to be added and we can take it from > >> > there. > >> > > >> > >> Would it make sense for there to be someone on the security list who > >> can assign CVE numbers? > > > > I'm pretty sure we have that already. > > Let me rephrase the question: > > Would it make sense for someone on the security list to assign CVE numbers?
If we cared about CVE numbers, maybe :) Seriously, there are people on the security alias that can get CVE numbers assigned if needed, so that should not be an issue. It's happened in the past from what I can recall. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/