Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Scaling our security process
Sasha Levin <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Jul 2026 14:38:13 -0400
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.ksummit |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <amellfuGPXzj_LeL@laps> |
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 10:08:48AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 at 07:37, Jiri Kosina <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Well, linux-distros@ is still there, and is used to coordinate security >> fixes in exactly this way consistently for vast majority of all the >> relevant projects, pretty much except for the kernel. With my distro hat >> on, I'd add "unfortunately". > >I refuse to have anything to do with linux-distros. > >They have a hard mandatory disclosure policy, which I think is >completely unacceptable. It means that if you send actual exploits to >the channel those exploits will be made public too. There is >absolutely no value in that, and it seems completely crazy to me. > >Yet exploit code - or at least a PoC - are hugely useful to >developers. So you do want to have people who figure out some security >issue - or any other bug, for that matter - to include such code, but >that does not mean that it should be made public. Does this asymmetry in effort between the fix and the reproducer/exploit code really exists these days? Point your favorite LLM at a commit that fixes an issue and ask it to reproduce the problem. You'll likely end up with working exploit code fairly quickly. >The *fix* obviously should be public, and the commit message needs to >explain the bug. And the threat of mandatory disclosure for any >unfixed bug is a good way to keep people honest. But disclosing >exploits after-the-fact as if everybody will have immediately >upgraded? Asinine. ... which is why I think that our current security process, and [email protected], effectively does something similar to linux-distros@: 1. We end up bringing more attention to a particular issue once the fix is merged. 2. We make the issue public before users had a chance to upgrade. 3. Any "script kiddie" is then able to generate a working exploit from the commit that fixes the issue. Even without [email protected], things like the syzkaller dashboard and the vulns.git CVE repo are effectively a massive public library of vulnerabilities. -- Thanks, Sasha