> because we have recently observed multiple cases of
rapid bug rediscovery by AI agents, sometimes within hours, and so now
consider long embargo periods to be a dangerous practice that primarily
benefits attackers.
Seems quite reasonable. It’s quite obvious that black hats have day jobs as White hats and have been privy to embargoes for probably decades.
InsidiousWombat 9 hours ago [-]
Embargo should last at most to the moment fix is made and code passes test suite.
Anything longer is putting systems at danger. I can recompile the package with a patch (even if Ubuntu/RHEL takes 3 weeks to do it) myself in a pinch, and I'd like to have a chance for it before the bug gets re-discovered by malicious party
tremon 7 hours ago [-]
What if the test suite passes in the middle of the night? Should all administrators interrupt their sleep and get up to recompile their servers immediately?
tsimionescu 3 hours ago [-]
All times are the middle of the night somewhere. Now, it's true that some times are the middle of the night to more people than others, but that's rarely a usable piece of info.
stonogo 7 hours ago [-]
That is generally the practice in professional environments, yes. Many places have an on-call rotation, and those that don't soon discover why. An embargo wouldn't fix that particular problem anyway, because time zones exist.
Xylakant 6 hours ago [-]
Also: There’s always midnight somewhere.
pgporada 7 hours ago [-]
[dead]
aomix 9 hours ago [-]
I think this is a long held belief of the project and why they have been excluded from bug embargo’s in the past.
Seems quite reasonable. It’s quite obvious that black hats have day jobs as White hats and have been privy to embargoes for probably decades.
Anything longer is putting systems at danger. I can recompile the package with a patch (even if Ubuntu/RHEL takes 3 weeks to do it) myself in a pinch, and I'd like to have a chance for it before the bug gets re-discovered by malicious party