Bug#1025071: closing 1025071

Path	csiph.com!news.samoylyk.net!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.kernel
Subject	Bug#1025071: closing 1025071
Date	Thu, 01 May 2025 23:00:02 +0200
Message-ID	<KHJaF-3BV-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<KHE1k-iZ-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <KHJaF-3BV-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <FxaIx-7aI3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <KHJaF-3BV-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To	Tobias Fiebig <tobias@fiebig.nl>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-bugs-dist-request@lists.debian.org Thu May 1 20:51:10 2025
Old-Return-Path	<debbugs@buxtehude.debian.org>
X-Spam-Flag	NO
X-Spam-Score	-3.999
Reply-To	Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>, 1025071@bugs.debian.org
Resent-To	debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org
Resent-Cc	Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
X-Debian-Pr-Message	followup 1025071
X-Debian-Pr-Package	src:linux
X-Debian-Pr-Source	linux
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition	inline
X-Debian-User	carnil
X-Debian-Message	from BTS
X-Mailing-List	<debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/1902777
List-ID	<debian-bugs-dist.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-bugs-dist/>
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	40
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Cc	1025071-submitter@bugs.debian.org, 1025071@bugs.debian.org
X-Original-Date	Thu, 1 May 2025 22:46:32 +0200
X-Original-Message-ID	<aBPdqLrWuk4_G4-F@eldamar.lan>
X-Original-References	<1746112735-746-bts-carnil@debian.org> <4e6f3691fdf4eb98827c18e4aec68425602582b9.camel@fiebig.nl> <166973522926.2255.13874589899105895537.reportbug@user-virtualbox> <4e6f3691fdf4eb98827c18e4aec68425602582b9.camel@fiebig.nl>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.bugs.dist:1244397 linux.debian.kernel:87278

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

Moin Tobias,

Thanks for acting on the bug.

On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 05:42:41PM +0200, Tobias Fiebig wrote:
> Moin,
> 
> Could you please elaborate on the decision to close this without
> reconsidering?
> 
> Essentially, the option to use a security feature is taken away from
> users (i.e., no option to enable it without rebuilding the kernel);
> 
> Not taking the option away from users would mean that those who would
> want to disable it would have to use an available sysctl.
> 
> To me, the latter sounds very much like an ideal scenario from a
> usability/security trade-off?

Let me try to be more verbose. There are the mentioned issues in the
bug which explain why in Debian the decision was to disable yama by
default (instead of having enabled it by default), which are related
to debugging. It does not mean that users cannot take advantage of the
Yama protection, but the sysctl know need to enable it. So it is just
hte other way around.

What I mean with not having reconsidered is that the potential change
has not made it to neither bookworm, nor trixie (to late now) and we
have not seen other real interest to have it reversed.

In the sense to finally clean up our longstanding bugs down I have
decided to close the bug, still with a clear note that if people feel
strong about the decision to reopen the bug with an expalnation on why
a particular feature is still desired (this time maybe for Debian
forky).

Hope this englights on the purpose of the bug closure.

Regards,
Salvatore

Back to linux.debian.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bug#1025071: closing 1025071 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-05-01 23:00 +0200
  Bug#1025071: closing 1025071 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-05-03 13:40 +0200
    Bug#1025071: closing 1025071 Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2025-05-10 10:20 +0200

csiph-web