On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Ignoring low bugs also probably isn't a viable stragegy
> for EPEL, because that's a long life distro stream, and
> so won't automatically get low CVE fixes via a rebase
> in 6 months like we do in Fedora. So the CVE mountain
> is even bigger for EPEL, and also more serious due to its
> long lifecycle.
Given that RHEL completely ignores low-impact security issues, I do not see
why EPEL should be held to a higher standard than RHEL itself.
This description of RHEL security issue handling is just plain wrong,
they are not ignored.