oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed?
From: "Luedtke, Nicholas (Cyber Security)" <nicholas.luedtke () hpe com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:38:41 -0500
On 1/18/2018 4:21 PM, Solar Designer wrote:
I think it's best for your project (I guess glibc?) to prominently publish near the security contact address a maximum embargo time you'd (be likely to) agree to. That's what security at kernel.org does (7 days) and what we do with (linux-)distros (14 days). That way, it's less important for you to judge whether the reason for embargo is valid/altruistic or bogus/selfish - a sane maximum embargo time minimizes the damage to all parties either way. When someone requests a longer embargo for whatever reason, just decline and insist on your previously published maximum. Those who want to have their issue disclosure timed with some other event will then be expected to delay reporting the issue to your project until it's close enough to that other event. That's not ideal, but I think it's better than having no maximum embargo time specified.
I generally agree with this, but it also creates the risk that reporters will simply wait till the maximum time frame fits within their desired reporting time. Which of course delays the reporting of the bug to the vendor/project. What I have seen in the past is a negotiated partial disclosure where the patch is released with minimum details with the line that says "Full details with be released by XXX at YYY conference." That way if ego is the factor then the reporter also gets a slight teaser for his/her talk. Of course one could just use the patch to get the details depending on the issue.
--Nicholas Luedtke HPE Cyber Security
Current thread:
- How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Florian Weimer (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Kurt Seifried (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Gynvael Coldwind (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Matthias Fetzer (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Yves-Alexis Perez (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Matthias Fetzer (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Ludovic Courtès (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Rich Felker (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Solar Designer (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Luedtke, Nicholas (Cyber Security) (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Solar Designer (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Nicholas Luedtke (Jan 19)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? i (Jan 19)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Greg KH (Jan 19)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Igor Seletskiy (Jan 19)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Tavis Ormandy (Jan 20)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Luedtke, Nicholas (Cyber Security) (Jan 18)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? r . hering (Jan 22)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Mikhail Utin (Jan 22)
- Re: How to deal with reporters who don't want their bugs fixed? Ian Zimmerman (Jan 22)