‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Several vulnerabilities have been discovered in the Linux kernel

576 points · 408 comments · luispa

  1. john_strinlai · · 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. SAI_Peregrinus · · focus · HN ↗
      Tautologically every bug can legitimately be assigned a CVE, since every bug prevents some feature from working as intended. It&#x27;s therefore a denial of service, which by the definition of the CVE system using CVSS means every bug is at least a 1&#x2F;Low level vulnerability to CVSS v4.0.

      If you&#x27;re willing to stretch, missing but planned features also deny the use of said features since they haven&#x27;t been added yet, and so are CVSS 1&#x2F;Low vulnerabilities.

      Resume-driven development for security researchers has never been easier!

      1. viraptor · · focus · HN ↗
        &gt; It&#x27;s therefore a denial of service

        That doesn&#x27;t follow. In the extremely simple example, an adding service returning 1+1=3 has a bug, but it&#x27;s not a possible DoS situation at all.

        &gt; missing but planned features also deny the use of said features

        That&#x27;s not what DoS is.

        This whole situation with CVE assigning comes from the whole process being far from ideal. But it doesn&#x27;t mean it&#x27;s completely useless and doesn&#x27;t follow any rules at all.

        1. nikanj · · focus · HN ↗
          That’s not what Mitre thinks though, they are very happy to host a 9.8 severity CVE for 1+1=3. They’ll probably publish one for 1-1=0 too, if you preface with ”The users of mathematics might not be prepared for zero values”
          1. eastbound · · focus · HN ↗
            This is why you need a library for additions. At least CVEs can be tracked appropriately, rather than the developer rolling out their NIH solution.
            1. josephg · · focus · HN ↗
              There’s probably an npm library for that. Not all heroes wear capes.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.