On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 06:17:05PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote: > I don't feel too strongly about it, and if you or Shung-Hsi still > think, on reflection, that backporting is desirable, then go ahead > and keep the Fixes: tag. > But maybe tweak the description so someone doesn't see "latent > unsoundness" and think they need to CVE and rush this patch out as > a security thing; it's more like hardening. *shrug* Unfortunately with Linux Kernel's current approach as a CVE Numbering Authority I don't think this can be avoided. Patches with fixes tag will almost certainly get a CVE number assigned (e.g. CVE-2024-26624[1][2]), and we can only dispute[3] after such assignment happend for the CVE to be rejected. Shung-Hsi 1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2024030648-CVE-2024-26624-3032@gregkh/ 2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2024032747-REJECTED-f2cf@gregkh/ 3: https://docs.kernel.org/process/cve.html#disputes-of-assigned-cves
