top | item 45897734

(no title)

etiennebausson | 3 months ago

Publicly posting an exploitable bug IS asking for someone to drop everything and come fix the issue NOW.

discuss

order

tpmoney|3 months ago

So when someone finds a bug in software, in your mind the only acceptable options are:

1) Fix it yourself

2) Sit on it silently until the maintainers finally get some time to fix it

That seems crazy to me. For one, not everyone who discovers a bug can fix it themselves. But also a patch doesn't fix it until it's merged. If filing a public bug report is expecting the maintainers to "drop everything and do free labor" then certainly dropping an unexpected PR with new code that makes heretofore unseen changes to a claimed security vulnerability must surely be a much stronger demand that the maintainers "drop everything" and do the "free labor" of validating the bug, validating the patch, merging the patch etc etc etc. So if the maintainers don't have time to patch a bug from a highly detailed bug report, they probably don't have time to review an unexpected patch for the same. So then what? Does people sit on that bug silently until someone finally gets around to having the time to review the PR. Or are they allowed to go public with the PR even though that's far more clearly a "demand to drop everything and come fix the issue NOW".

I for one am quite happy the guy who found the XZ backdoor went public before a fix was in place. And if tomorrow someone discovers that all Debian 13 releases have a vulnerable SSH installation that allows root logins with the password `12345`, I frankly don't give a damn how overworked the SSH or Debian maintainers are, I want them to go public with that information too so the rest of us can shut off our Debian servers.

naasking|3 months ago

Responsible disclosure policies for contributor-driven projects can differ from commercial projects. Also, if Google has the funds to pay for bug finding, they also have the funds for bug fixing the community projects they depend on.

etiennebausson|3 months ago

xz was a fundamentally different problem, it was code that had been maliciously introduced to a widespread library and the corrupted version was in the process of being deployed to multiple distributions. The clock was very much ticking.