On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 10:42:15AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 02:20:58PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > It is no longer viable to handle the incredible volumes of > > AI assisted security disclosures via email, nor are extended > > embargos practical or useful. > > > > Remove all information about the current security process and > > instruct reporters to use 'confidential' issues. In contrast > > to the old highly restrictive "need to know" approach, the > > new approach makes all security issues visible to all QEMU > > maintainers immediately. > > > > The focus is on making issues public as soon as possible with > > a viable patch. Co-ordinated disclosure will no longer be > > attempted and nor will requests to embargoes be accepted. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> > > Thanks for taking on this. One question: > > > > --- > > contribute/report-a-bug.md | 9 +- > > contribute/security-process.md | 309 +++++++++++++++------------------ > > 2 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 170 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/contribute/report-a-bug.md b/contribute/report-a-bug.md > > index fd3bc6b..b506f9f 100644 > > --- a/contribute/report-a-bug.md > > +++ b/contribute/report-a-bug.md > > @@ -11,6 +11,11 @@ on GitLab, taking into account the following guidance. > > requested pieces of information that are relevant to the > > discovered bug. > > > > +* Bugs which are suspected, or known, to have security implications > > + **must** be marked as "*confidential*" prior to submitting the > > + disclosure. Consult the [security process](../security-process) > > + for further guidance on security issue handling. > > + > > * Reproduce the problem with the latest upstream QEMU release. > > Reports against older versions may not be acted upon with > > with the same priority. > > > There's a problem here in that confidential marking is later > erased. I feel would is benefitial to tag the security bugs > in some way that does not go away so easily. Any idea?
Yes, see this paragraph.... > > + * If confirmed as a security flaw, a maintainer will add the > > + **"Kind::Security"**, **"Workflow::Confirmed"** and > > + **"CVE::Required"** labels.. The latter indicates the need > > + for a CNA to allocate a CVE. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com ~~ https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :| |: https://libvirt.org ~~ https://entangle-photo.org :| |: https://pixelfed.art/berrange ~~ https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
