Thread

1. john_strinlai · 1790902914 · focus · HN ↗

   note that _any_ bugfix is assigned a cve, which makes for big numbers.

   >“Due to the layer at which the Linux kernel is in a system, almost any bug might be exploitable to compromise the security of the kernel… Because of this, the CVE assignment team is overly cautious and assign CVE numbers to any bugfix that they identify.”

   <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.kernel.org&#x2F;process&#x2F;cve.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.kernel.org&#x2F;process&#x2F;cve.html

   &quot;number of cves&quot; is a useless metric, especially when it comes to the kernel.

   1. rerdavies · 1790903492 · focus · HN ↗

      With particular emphasis on &quot;almost any bug might be exploitable&quot;.

      1. SoftTalker · 1790905323 · focus · HN ↗

         Even a bug-free program might be exploitable.

         1. catlifeonmars · 1790905605 · focus · HN ↗

            That sounds like a bug

            1. SoftTalker · 1790906390 · focus · HN ↗

               There are programs like sudo whose entire reason for existing is to enable privilege escalation. If you can find a way to make a user &quot;sudo&quot; something, that&#x27;s an exploit, but it&#x27;s not a bug in the program.

               1. odo1242 · 1790906687 · focus · HN ↗

                  At that point you&#x27;re exploiting the user, who is not a bug-free program

                  1. rerdavies · 1790916766 · focus · HN ↗

                     Remove user and press any key to continue.

                     :-P

                     1. whiskey-one · 1790945189 · focus · HN ↗

                        Indeed, the user is the hardest part of the program to secure.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.