oss-sec mailing list archives
Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions
From: "Steven M. Christey" <coley () mitre org>
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 17:36:13 -0500 (EST)
On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, gremlin () gremlin ru wrote:
On 2015-01-04 15:06:51 +1100, Dave Horsfall wrote: >> | Use CVE-2014-9491. >> Shouldn't we be using CVE-2015-XXXX by now? > I'd rather see CVE-2015-XXXXX - look how close we came... > Is there a CVE for that? First CVE ID in 2015 is CVE-2015-0001; once we get to CVE-2015-9999, the next ID will be CVE-2015-10000. Consider it as "CVE-%u-%04u".
People who consider the ID format as "CVE-%u-%04u" might not comply with all the example IDs provided in CVE test data, as made available to the public for almost a year at http://cve.mitre.org/cve/identifiers/syntaxchange.html#guidance
- Steve
Current thread:
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions cve-assign (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Christos Zoulas (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Joshua Rogers (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Dave Horsfall (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions gremlin (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Alan Coopersmith (Jan 04)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Marcus Meissner (Jan 04)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Steven M. Christey (Jan 04)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Christos Zoulas (Jan 03)
- Re: CVE Request for illumos distributions Steven M. Christey (Jan 04)