From f2b1cbef153636fa498324b47e822e8b4d1774aa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Willy Tarreau Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2026 08:20:16 +0200 Subject: Documentation: minor updates to the security contacts This clarifies the fact that the bug reporters must use a valid e-mail address to send their report, and that the security team assists developers working on a fix but doesn't always produce fixes on its own. Cc: Eric Dumazet Cc: Greg KH Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260403062018.31080-2-w@1wt.eu Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 12 +++++++----- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation') diff --git a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst index c0cf93e11565..da7937fd59df 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst @@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ 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. +Reports are to be sent over e-mail exclusively. Please use a working e-mail +address, preferably the same that you want to appear in ``Reported-by`` tags +if any. If unsure, send your report to yourself first. + The security team and maintainers almost always require additional information beyond what was initially provided in a report and rely on active and efficient collaboration with the reporter to perform further @@ -27,11 +31,9 @@ made public. The Linux kernel security team can be contacted by email at . 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. +who will help verify the bug report and assist developers working on a fix. +It is possible that the security team will bring in extra help from area +maintainers to understand and fix the security vulnerability. Please send **plain text** emails without attachments where possible. It is much harder to have a context-quoted discussion about a complex -- cgit v1.2.3 From a72b832a482372001a158c8014d116b053089b5d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Willy Tarreau Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2026 08:20:17 +0200 Subject: Documentation: explain how to find maintainers addresses for security reports These days, 80% of the work done by the security team consists in locating the affected subsystem in a report, running get_maintainers on it, forwarding the report to these persons and responding to the reporter with them in Cc. This is a huge and unneeded overhead that we must try to lower for a better overall efficiency. This patch adds a complete section explaining how to figure the list of recipients to send the report to. Cc: Eric Dumazet Cc: Greg KH Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260403062018.31080-3-w@1wt.eu Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation') diff --git a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst index da7937fd59df..ac97fc78fecd 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst @@ -5,8 +5,75 @@ 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. +disclosed as quickly as possible. + +Identifying contacts +-------------------- + +The most effective way to report a security bug is to send it directly to the +affected subsystem's maintainers and Cc: the Linux kernel security team. Do +not send it to a public list at this stage, unless you have good reasons to +consider the issue as being public or trivial to discover (e.g. result of a +widely available automated vulnerability scanning tool that can be repeated by +anyone). + +If you're sending a report for issues affecting multiple parts in the kernel, +even if they're fairly similar issues, please send individual messages (think +that maintainers will not all work on the issues at the same time). The only +exception is when an issue concerns closely related parts maintained by the +exact same subset of maintainers, and these parts are expected to be fixed all +at once by the same commit, then it may be acceptable to report them at once. + +One difficulty for most first-time reporters is to figure the right list of +recipients to send a report to. In the Linux kernel, all official maintainers +are trusted, so the consequences of accidentally including the wrong maintainer +are essentially a bit more noise for that person, i.e. nothing dramatic. As +such, a suitable method to figure the list of maintainers (which kernel +security officers use) is to rely on the get_maintainers.pl script, tuned to +only report maintainers. This script, when passed a file name, will look for +its path in the MAINTAINERS file to figure a hierarchical list of relevant +maintainers. Calling it a first time with the finest level of filtering will +most of the time return a short list of this specific file's maintainers:: + + $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-l --no-r --pattern-depth 1 \ + drivers/example.c + Developer One (maintainer:example driver) + Developer Two (maintainer:example driver) + +These two maintainers should then receive the message. If the command does not +return anything, it means the affected file is part of a wider subsystem, so we +should be less specific:: + + $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-l --no-r drivers/example.c + Developer One (maintainer:example subsystem) + Developer Two (maintainer:example subsystem) + Developer Three (maintainer:example subsystem [GENERAL]) + Developer Four (maintainer:example subsystem [GENERAL]) + +Here, picking the first, most specific ones, is sufficient. When the list is +long, it is possible to produce a comma-delimited e-mail address list on a +single line suitable for use in the To: field of a mailer like this:: + + $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-tree --no-l --no-r --no-n --m \ + --no-git-fallback --no-substatus --no-rolestats --no-multiline \ + --pattern-depth 1 drivers/example.c + dev1@example.com, dev2@example.org + +or this for the wider list:: + + $ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-tree --no-l --no-r --no-n --m \ + --no-git-fallback --no-substatus --no-rolestats --no-multiline \ + drivers/example.c + dev1@example.com, dev2@example.org, dev3@example.com, dev4@example.org + +If at this point you're still facing difficulties spotting the right +maintainers, **and only in this case**, it's possible to send your report to +the Linux kernel security team only. Your message will be triaged, and you +will receive instructions about whom to contact, if needed. Your message may +equally be forwarded as-is to the relevant maintainers. + +Sending the report +------------------ Reports are to be sent over e-mail exclusively. Please use a working e-mail address, preferably the same that you want to appear in ``Reported-by`` tags @@ -29,6 +96,7 @@ 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. +The report must be sent to maintainers, with the security team in ``Cc:``. The Linux kernel security team can be contacted by email at . This is a private list of security officers who will help verify the bug report and assist developers working on a fix. @@ -44,7 +112,9 @@ reproduction steps, and follow it with a proposed fix, all in plain text. Markdown, HTML and RST formatted reports are particularly frowned upon since they're quite hard to read for humans and encourage to use dedicated viewers, sometimes online, which by definition is not acceptable for a confidential -security report. +security report. Note that some mailers tend to mangle formatting of plain +text by default, please consult Documentation/process/email-clients.rst for +more info. Disclosure and embargoed information ------------------------------------ -- cgit v1.2.3 From 496fa1befba1e8ff149af5120cd9c9616bb05120 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Willy Tarreau Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2026 08:20:18 +0200 Subject: Documentation: clarify the mandatory and desirable info for security reports A significant part of the effort of the security team consists in begging reporters for patch proposals, or asking them to provide them in regular format, and most of the time they're willing to provide this, they just didn't know that it would help. So let's add a section detailing the required and desirable contents in a security report to help reporters write more actionable reports which do not require round trips. Cc: Eric Dumazet Cc: Greg KH Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260403062018.31080-4-w@1wt.eu Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation') diff --git a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst index ac97fc78fecd..0b1f6d8e3cbe 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst @@ -7,6 +7,65 @@ 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. +Preparing your report +--------------------- + +Like with any bug report, a security bug report requires a lot of analysis work +from the developers, so the more information you can share about the issue, the +better. Please review the procedure outlined in +Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst if you are unclear about what +information is helpful. The following information are absolutely necessary in +**any** security bug report: + + * **affected kernel version range**: with no version indication, your report + will not be processed. A significant part of reports are for bugs that + have already been fixed, so it is extremely important that vulnerabilities + are verified on recent versions (development tree or latest stable + version), at least by verifying that the code has not changed since the + version where it was detected. + + * **description of the problem**: a detailed description of the problem, with + traces showing its manifestation, and why you consider that the observed + behavior as a problem in the kernel, is necessary. + + * **reproducer**: developers will need to be able to reproduce the problem to + consider a fix as effective. This includes both a way to trigger the issue + and a way to confirm it happens. A reproducer with low complexity + dependencies will be needed (source code, shell script, sequence of + instructions, file-system image etc). Binary-only executables are not + accepted. Working exploits are extremely helpful and will not be released + without consent from the reporter, unless they are already public. By + definition if an issue cannot be reproduced, it is not exploitable, thus it + is not a security bug. + + * **conditions**: if the bug depends on certain configuration options, + sysctls, permissions, timing, code modifications etc, these should be + indicated. + +In addition, the following information are highly desirable: + + * **suspected location of the bug**: the file names and functions where the + bug is suspected to be present are very important, at least to help forward + the report to the appropriate maintainers. When not possible (for example, + "system freezes each time I run this command"), the security team will help + identify the source of the bug. + + * **a proposed fix**: bug reporters who have analyzed the cause of a bug in + the source code almost always have an accurate idea on how to fix it, + because they spent a long time studying it and its implications. Proposing + a tested fix will save maintainers a lot of time, even if the fix ends up + not being the right one, because it helps understand the bug. When + proposing a tested fix, please always format it in a way that can be + immediately merged (see Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst). + This will save some back-and-forth exchanges if it is accepted, and you + will be credited for finding and fixing this issue. Note that in this case + only a ``Signed-off-by:`` tag is needed, without ``Reported-by:` when the + reporter and author are the same. + + * **mitigations**: very often during a bug analysis, some ways of mitigating + the issue appear. It is useful to share them, as they can be helpful to + keep end users protected during the time it takes them to apply the fix. + Identifying contacts -------------------- @@ -89,13 +148,6 @@ run additional tests. Reports where the reporter does not respond promptly or cannot effectively discuss their findings may be abandoned if the communication does not quickly improve. -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 -'Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.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. - The report must be sent to maintainers, with the security team in ``Cc:``. The Linux kernel security team can be contacted by email at . This is a private list of security officers -- cgit v1.2.3 From f387e2e2b9d302688dbdceebe9aade221c90f09e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Willy Tarreau Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2026 10:20:33 +0200 Subject: Documentation: fix two typos in latest update to the security report howto In previous patch "Documentation: clarify the mandatory and desirable info for security reports" I left two typos that I didn't detect in local checks. One is "get_maintainers.pl" (no 's' in the script name), and the other one is a missing closing quote after "Reported-by", which didn't have effect here but I don't know if it can break rendering elsewhere (e.g. on the public HTML page). Better fix it before it gets merged. Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260404082033.5160-1-w@1wt.eu Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'Documentation') diff --git a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst index 0b1f6d8e3cbe..27b028e85861 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ In addition, the following information are highly desirable: immediately merged (see Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst). This will save some back-and-forth exchanges if it is accepted, and you will be credited for finding and fixing this issue. Note that in this case - only a ``Signed-off-by:`` tag is needed, without ``Reported-by:` when the + only a ``Signed-off-by:`` tag is needed, without ``Reported-by:`` when the reporter and author are the same. * **mitigations**: very often during a bug analysis, some ways of mitigating @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ recipients to send a report to. In the Linux kernel, all official maintainers are trusted, so the consequences of accidentally including the wrong maintainer are essentially a bit more noise for that person, i.e. nothing dramatic. As such, a suitable method to figure the list of maintainers (which kernel -security officers use) is to rely on the get_maintainers.pl script, tuned to +security officers use) is to rely on the get_maintainer.pl script, tuned to only report maintainers. This script, when passed a file name, will look for its path in the MAINTAINERS file to figure a hierarchical list of relevant maintainers. Calling it a first time with the finest level of filtering will -- cgit v1.2.3