RE: Current standards/criteria for 'Undefined Behavior'

["Waltermire, David A. (Fed)" <david.waltermire@nist.gov>]

What Brian is asking for here is something we absolutely should be 
doing to host a healthy board community. My schedule has been chaotic 
recently and I haven't been able to attend the calls like I normally 
do. Posting these types of issues to the list would give me a way to 
contribute to the conversation when I cannot be on the calls. I am sure 
others on the board share the same view on this as Brian and me.

We have talked about this quite a few times, but change has been slow 
and incomplete. How do we make this a standard practice going forward?

Thanks,
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org 
> [mailto:owner-cve-
> editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org] On Behalf Of jericho
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 1:15 PM
> To: Coffin, Chris <ccoffin@mitre.org>
> Cc: Carsten Eiram <che@riskbasedsecurity.com>; 
> cve-editorial-board-list
> <cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org>
> Subject: RE: Current standards/criteria for 'Undefined Behavior'
> Importance: High
> 
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2017, Coffin, Chris wrote:
> 
> : Yes. We discussed on a Board call and decided to discontinue 
> assignment
> : for undefined behavior issues.
> 
> A couple things:
> 
> 1. Which call? I do not see this topic in the meeting minutes for the 
> last three
> meetings.
> 
> 2. If a new policy is implemented based on a conference call, it 
> would benefit
> everyone if it was more clearly stated in the meeting minutes, and it 
> should
> also be posted directly to the list under a new thread.
> 
> 3. There are issues I bring up on list, that are then discussed almost
> exclusively on the calls with a fraction of the board present. The 
> gist of the
> discussion and even the final disposition are not always included in 
> the
> minutes, and not brought to the list. That leaves emails to the board 
> list that
> appear to be unaddressed in any fashion. Since the list is public, 
> this is not a
> good external perception for MITRE or the Board.
> 
> Brian