Technology

1083 readers

42 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.

Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.

Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

MinutePhrase@lemmy.ml

Dev rejects CVE severity, makes his GitHub repo read-only (www.bleepingcomputer.com)

submitted 4 months ago by floofloof@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.ml

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] bl4kers@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago

Disputing a CVE is no straightforward task either, as a GitHub security team member explained. It requires a project maintainer to chase the CVE Numbering Authorities (CNA) that had originally issued the CVE.

CNAs have conventionally comprised NIST's NVD and MITRE. Over the past few years, technology companies and security vendors joined the list and are also able to issue CVEs at will.

These seems like an issue worth addressing. If it's too easy to report and too difficult to dispute, I could see the CVE ecosystem be weaponized and turned into a political tool.