Linux

48328 readers

659 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

Are all Linux vendor kernels insecure? A new study says yes, but there's a fix (www.zdnet.com)

submitted 6 months ago by 0nekoneko7@lemmy.world to c/linux@lemmy.ml

18 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] biribiri11@lemmy.ml 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It’s funny, because there was research done by UC Riverside which specifically figured out LTS branches receive patches for CVEs significantly later than vendor specific branches. Specifically:

Interestingly, we note that the picked CVE patches appear in distributions 74.2 days earlier than LTS on average;

They also conveniently left out the part of Greg KH’s opinion stating that he recommends the use of vendor kernels over stable/LTS branches, too.

I found this particularly funny:

It all comes down to a delicate balancing act between security and stability. Some top Linux kernel developers and CIQ are coming down on the side of security.

Now I know CIQ is “supposedly” different from rocky, but what is CIQ going to do, break bug-for-bug compat and use stable kernels in their supported version of Rocky? This entire article feels like it doesn’t fundamentally understand that not all bugs (especially ones that lead to potential low-ranking CVEs) aren’t worth patching.