|
|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AMD crash bug
- To: cve-editorial-board-list <cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
- Subject: AMD crash bug
- From: Kurt Seifried <kurt@seifried.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 18:14:28 -0600
- Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is 129.83.29.2) smtp.mailfrom=LISTS.MITRE.ORG; mitre.mail.onmicrosoft.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;mitre.mail.onmicrosoft.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=seifried.org;
- Delivery-date: Fri Mar 24 07:47:57 2017
- List-help: <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTS.MITRE.ORG?body=INFO%20CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST>
- List-owner: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
- List-subscribe: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-subscribe-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:CVE-EDITORIAL-BOARD-LIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
- Sender: <owner-cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
- Spamdiagnosticmetadata: 6cdb8bfc89744bd8bfee511e3e65aa05
- Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:2
So a Linux/Windows kernel crash triggered by a normal user would get a CVE. Why doesn't this get a CVE? Especially as it's fixable with a microcode update...
I think we need to cover hardware cases where it bricks/crashes the system/hardware at a minimum.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: AMD crash bug
- From: "Landfield, Kent B" <kent.b.landfield@intel.com>
- Re: AMD crash bug
- Prev by Date: Re: CVE 101 White Paper - Board Review
- Next by Date: Re: AMD crash bug
- Previous by thread: Re: CVE 101 White Paper - Board Review
- Next by thread: Re: AMD crash bug
- Index(es):