John R Pierce wrote:
> 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.
We don't have a bug tracker, see the current FAQ.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
