Re: Port Randomization: New revision of our IETF Internet-Draft

[Pavel Labushev <p.labushev () gmail com>]

Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu ?????:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:17:43 +0800, Pavel Labushev said:
>
> > "SECURITY PATCH tag on a fix" helps me to know that there is the problem 
> > and I must consider the patch, check its correctness and maybe 
> > test/backport/apply it to my production systems ASAP. Just as another 
> > tags helps me to know that there are realiability and other issues I 
> > must care about.
>
> OK, now s/security patch/silent data corruption/ and tell me what's *actually*
> different.

The consequences are actually and obviously different. Now, please, try 
to figure out that by yourself. Forget about Linus' point. Pretend 
you're system administrator and try to think like one.

> Wow, you still need to consider it, check it, test it, and deploy it.

Not exactly.

> Unless of course you don't give a shit about your data.  But in that case,
> the security patch can probably be overlooked too.

Hint: the data can be backed up.

> That's Linus's point - if the patch is important enough to go into one of
> the -stable tree kernels, it's probably something you want to install, whether
> or not it's a security patch.

Whether or not so-called -stable kernels are always stable - is another 
question. And not a last one - there are more.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/