|  | .. _securitybugs: | 
|  |  | 
|  | Security bugs | 
|  | ============= | 
|  |  | 
|  | Linux kernel developers take security very seriously.  As such, we'd | 
|  | like to know when a security bug is found so that it can be fixed and | 
|  | disclosed as quickly as possible.  Please report security bugs to the | 
|  | Linux kernel security team. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Contact | 
|  | ------- | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Linux kernel security team can be contacted by email at | 
|  | <security@kernel.org>.  This is a private list of security officers | 
|  | who will help verify the bug report and develop and release a fix. | 
|  | If you already have a fix, please include it with your report, as | 
|  | that can speed up the process considerably.  It is possible that the | 
|  | security team will bring in extra help from area maintainers to | 
|  | understand and fix the security vulnerability. | 
|  |  | 
|  | As it is with any bug, the more information provided the easier it | 
|  | will be to diagnose and fix.  Please review the procedure outlined in | 
|  | admin-guide/reporting-bugs.rst if you are unclear about what | 
|  | information is helpful.  Any exploit code is very helpful and will not | 
|  | be released without consent from the reporter unless it has already been | 
|  | made public. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Disclosure and embargoed information | 
|  | ------------------------------------ | 
|  |  | 
|  | The security list is not a disclosure channel.  For that, see Coordination | 
|  | below. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Once a robust fix has been developed, the release process starts.  Fixes | 
|  | for publicly known bugs are released immediately. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Although our preference is to release fixes for publicly undisclosed bugs | 
|  | as soon as they become available, this may be postponed at the request of | 
|  | the reporter or an affected party for up to 7 calendar days from the start | 
|  | of the release process, with an exceptional extension to 14 calendar days | 
|  | if it is agreed that the criticality of the bug requires more time.  The | 
|  | only valid reason for deferring the publication of a fix is to accommodate | 
|  | the logistics of QA and large scale rollouts which require release | 
|  | coordination. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Whilst embargoed information may be shared with trusted individuals in | 
|  | order to develop a fix, such information will not be published alongside | 
|  | the fix or on any other disclosure channel without the permission of the | 
|  | reporter.  This includes but is not limited to the original bug report | 
|  | and followup discussions (if any), exploits, CVE information or the | 
|  | identity of the reporter. | 
|  |  | 
|  | In other words our only interest is in getting bugs fixed.  All other | 
|  | information submitted to the security list and any followup discussions | 
|  | of the report are treated confidentially even after the embargo has been | 
|  | lifted, in perpetuity. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Coordination | 
|  | ------------ | 
|  |  | 
|  | Fixes for sensitive bugs, such as those that might lead to privilege | 
|  | escalations, may need to be coordinated with the private | 
|  | <linux-distros@vs.openwall.org> mailing list so that distribution vendors | 
|  | are well prepared to issue a fixed kernel upon public disclosure of the | 
|  | upstream fix. Distros will need some time to test the proposed patch and | 
|  | will generally request at least a few days of embargo, and vendor update | 
|  | publication prefers to happen Tuesday through Thursday. When appropriate, | 
|  | the security team can assist with this coordination, or the reporter can | 
|  | include linux-distros from the start. In this case, remember to prefix | 
|  | the email Subject line with "[vs]" as described in the linux-distros wiki: | 
|  | <http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros#how-to-use-the-lists> | 
|  |  | 
|  | CVE assignment | 
|  | -------------- | 
|  |  | 
|  | The security team does not normally assign CVEs, nor do we require them | 
|  | for reports or fixes, as this can needlessly complicate the process and | 
|  | may delay the bug handling. If a reporter wishes to have a CVE identifier | 
|  | assigned ahead of public disclosure, they will need to contact the private | 
|  | linux-distros list, described above. When such a CVE identifier is known | 
|  | before a patch is provided, it is desirable to mention it in the commit | 
|  | message if the reporter agrees. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Non-disclosure agreements | 
|  | ------------------------- | 
|  |  | 
|  | The Linux kernel security team is not a formal body and therefore unable | 
|  | to enter any non-disclosure agreements. |