oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions
From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried () redhat com>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:47:45 -0600
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Leo Famulari <leo () famulari name> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:27:47PM -0700, Seth Arnold wrote:I suspect the solution is for people who rely upon these scanning toolstodo the leg work themselves on the packages they care about. (i.e., the packages that annoy them the most.)I think those of us who find these tools useful should work to improve the CVE database by adding the "fixed-in-version" information as it becomes available.
This is a major goal of 1) using the JSON format with richer data [a] 2) allowing other people (e.g. CVE Mentors) to edit the data [a] https://github.com/CVEProject/automation-working-group/blob/master/cve_json_schema/DRAFT-JSON-file-format-v4.md -- Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993 Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert () redhat com
Current thread:
- Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Ludovic Courtès (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Simon McVittie (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Seth Arnold (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Leo Famulari (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Kurt Seifried (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Jerome Athias (Mar 16)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Jerome Athias (Mar 16)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Leo Famulari (Mar 15)
- Re: Dealing with CVEs that apply to unspecified package versions Jerome Athias (Mar 18)