Re: [HACKERS] BUG #2052: Federal Agency Tech Hub Refuses to

John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>

From: John R Pierce <pierce@hogranch.com>

To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>

Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Ferindo Middleton <fmiddleton@verizon.net>, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org

Date: 2005-11-25T20:42:56Z

Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> If someone wants to create a separate web page to track fixes related to
> CVE number, that is fine.  My guess is that most people reading the
> release notes don't care about the CVE numbers themselves (just that
> each release has all known security bugs fixed), and most bugs that are
> fixed don't have CVE numbers at commit time.

I think its quite reasonable for the one line description of a postgres 
bug to reference "CVE-2005-0247 multiple buffer overflows..." or 
whatever, I guess it kind of depends on which came first...  if the CVE 
security item came first, and was entered into the PGSQL bug tracker, 
then this makes a LOT of sense.  if the CVE folks create their entry 
AFTER the bug has been entered into PGSQL, it makes less sense.