On 10/25/22 17:21, Dave Taht wrote:
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:37 AM Peter Naulls wrote:
On 10/24/22 18:21, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hauke, thanks for replying!
As I said on a related thread - if an eu body can be found to care
more deeply on these issues, I'm pretty sure
30-50k of funding is
On 10/25/22 16:29, Peter Naulls wrote:
On 10/24/22 18:21, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hauke, thanks for replying!
I also prefer if the CVE number is named in the patch. If this is
missing somewhere you could send a patch or pull request to rename the
patch.
I'm afraid I don't have any explicit
On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 7:37 AM Peter Naulls wrote:
>
> On 10/24/22 18:21, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
>
> Hauke, thanks for replying!
As I said on a related thread - if an eu body can be found to care
more deeply on these issues, I'm pretty sure
30-50k of funding is available via one or more of
On 10/24/22 18:21, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
Hauke, thanks for replying!
I also prefer if the CVE number is named in the patch. If this is missing
somewhere you could send a patch or pull request to rename the patch.
I'm afraid I don't have any explicit examples, but I'll let you know if
find
On 10/20/22 22:26, Peter Naulls wrote:
Apologies for the obtuseness of the previous email about the squashfs
permissions - that's related to the following, but a different topic. I
can now
say that we're undergoing a security review for our system which is very
much
based upon OpenWrt
I feel your pain, and with the dual provenance of the openwrt kernel
(linux X.Y and usually a backport of mac80211) it gets harder.
(But other world vendors have it much, much harder, with their frankenkernels)
I don't know what guidelines are coming out of this effort
(https://openssf.org/ ) is
