• Atemu
    link
    fedilink
    4510 months ago

    Security-critical C and memory safety bugs. Name a more iconic duo…

    I’d have kinda preferred for public disclosure to have happened after the fix propagated to distros. Now we get to hurry the patch to end-users which isn’t always easily possible. Could we at least have a coordinated disclosure time each month? That’d be great.

      • Atemu
        link
        fedilink
        1110 months ago

        They did follow that. You can read their disclosure timeline in their report.

        Problem is that the devs of glibc aren’t the only people interested in getting glibc patched but us distro maintainers too.

        What I would have preferred would be an early private disclosure to the upstream maintainers and then a public but intentionally unspecific disclosure with just the severity to give us distro people some time to prepare a swift rollout when the full disclosure happens and the patch becomes public.

        Alternatively, what would be even better would have been to actually ship the patch in a release but not disclose its severity (or even try to hide it by making it seem like a refactor or non-security relevant bugfix) until a week or two later; ensuring that any half-decent distro release process and user upgrade cycle will have the patch before its severity is disclosed. That’s how the Linux kernel does it AFAIK and it’s the most reasonable approach I’ve seen.