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

Confusion about runc status in dla-needed



Hi

I was about to remove runc from dla-needed but since Adrian sent out a question email about the removal I thought one more time. (I'm trying to learn from my mistakes) :-)

I'm getting a little confused about the notes about runc in dla-needed.
It says Complete fix for CVE-2024-21626 would require backport of ...
But CVE-2024-21626 looks like it is already fixed by DLA-3735-1.

If one look at the status information in the data/CVE/list it looks like it is completely corrected.
But from the dla-needed note it looks like it is not. What is it?
Is it a sufficient fix?

Should we issue a new CVE for the remaining part?
Should it be fixed?
Should that remaining part be ignored?

My assumption is the following:
The CVE is not completely fixed but fixing the rest is not worth doing.

With that assumption I'm now removing the entry from dla-needed.

Please let me if this is not correct.
I have moved the note from dla-needed to the CVE itself.

Cheers

// Ola

--
 --- Inguza Technology AB --- MSc in Information Technology ----
|  ola@inguza.com                    opal@debian.org            |
|  http://inguza.com/                Mobile: +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
 ---------------------------------------------------------------


Reply to: