Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Submission Preview

Link to Story

The Linux CNA Mess You Didn't Know About

Accepted submission by hubie at 2024-06-07 00:40:50
Code

Risky Biz News: The Linux CNA mess you didn't know about [risky.biz]:

The Linux Kernel project was made [cve.org] an official CVE Numbering Authority (CNA) with exclusive rights to issue CVE identifiers for the Linux kernal in February this year.

While initially this looked like good news, almost three months later, this has turned into a complete and utter disaster.

Over the past months, the Linux Kernel team has issued thousands of CVE identifiers, with the vast majority being for trivial bug fixes and not just security flaws.

Just in May alone, the Linux team issued over 1,100 CVEs, according to Cisco's Jerry Gamblin [x.com]—a number that easily beat out professional bug bounty programs/platforms run by the likes of Trend Micro ZDI, Wordfence, and Patchstack.

Ironically, this was a disaster waiting to happen, with the Linux Kernel team laying out [lwn.net] some weird rules [kernel.org] for issuing CVEs right after the moment it received its CNA status.

We say weird because they are quite unique among all CNAs. The Linux kernel team argues that because of the deep layer where the kernel runs, bugs are hard to understand, and there is always a possibility of them becoming a security issue later down the line. Direct quote below:

"Note, due to the layer at which the Linux kernel is in a system, almost any bug might be exploitable to compromise the security of the kernel, but the possibility of exploitation is often not evident when the bug is fixed. Because of this, the CVE assignment team is overly cautious and assign CVE numbers to any bugfix that they identify. This explains the seemingly large number of CVEs that are issued by the Linux kernel team."

[...] Instead, the Linux Kernel team appears to have adopted a simpler approach where it puts a CVE on everything and lets the software and infosec community at large confirm that an issue is an authentic security flaw. If it's not, it's on the security and vulnerability management firms to file CVE revocation requests with the precise Linux Kernel team that runs the affected component.

The new Linux CNA rules also prohibit the issuance of CVEs for bugs in EOL Linux kernels, which is also another weird take on security. Just because you don't maintain the code anymore, that doesn't mean attackers won't exploit it and that people wouldn't want to track it.

The Linux team will also refuse to assign CVEs until a patch has been deployed, meaning there will be no CVEs for zero-days or vulnerabilities that may require a longer reporting and patching timeline.

[...] And if this isn't bad enough, the Linux kernel team appears to be backfiling CVEs [mastodon.social] for fixes to last year's code, generating even more noise for people who use CVEs for legitimate purposes.

[...] Unfortunately, all of this CVE spam also could have not happened at a worse time. Just as the Linux Kernel team was getting its CNA status, NIST was slowing down [risky.biz] its management of the NVD database—where all CVEs are compiled and enriched.

NIST cited a staff shortage and a sudden rise in the number of reported vulnerabilities—mainly from the IoT space. Having one of every fifth CVE being a Linux non-security bug isn't helping NIST at all right now.


Original Submission