Re: Gtk2 1.2495 (stable) available

Hi all;

Outside of the CVE route, GNOME uses the distributors-list mailing list for communication between GNOME modules and "downstream" distribution teams. It's good to use that list for notifying of changes or releases that have particular impact on distributions.


On Wednesday, 18 February 2015, intrigeri <intrigeri debian org> wrote:
Hi Tosten,

Torsten Schoenfeld wrote (28 Jan 2015 19:31:55 GMT) :
> On 28.01.2015 17:51, intrigeri wrote:

>> Thanks. I've not seen a CVE request on oss-security (could have missed
>> it, though). Will it be allocated in another way, e.g. from the Red
>> Hat pool? A CVE would help distros a lot.

> No, we haven't done any kind of official security-related announcement.
> Do you really need such an "official" and elaborate effort for this
> kind of bug fix?

*I* don't need this since I read this list :)

But for other operating systems, yes, a CVE is needed. In the case at
hand, 3 weeks after the bug was fixed:

  * Fedora 20 and 21 have patched it
  * Debian still hasn't patched it (my fault)
  * Ubuntu hasn't patched it
  * OpenSUSE hasn't patched it

=> I guess that some major distros have nobody subscribed to
gtk-perl-list@ (no big surprise, considering the amount of Perl
modules they're packaging), and thus haven't heard of this potential
security issue yet. That's one very good reason to issue a CVE in
my opinion.

> These kinds of fixes are done all over the place all the time
> without special announcements.

IMO that's a problem that all OS security teams everywhere are
struggling against. A good explanation of why a CVE is needed was
provided a few weeks ago by Kurt Seifried (Red Hat product security):

gtk-perl-list mailing list
gtk-perl-list gnome org

[ ] ebassi []

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]