Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Roberto C(dot) Sánchez <roberto(at)debian(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Backport of CVE-2024-10978 fix to older pgsql versions (11, 9.6, and 9.4)
Date: 2024-12-31 20:52:07
Message-ID: Z3RZd4J--uLrKf8B@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 01:47:19PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 1:30 PM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2024 at 03:19:25PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>
> > My thinking was "ask once, bump the thread once after 2 or 3 weeks just
> > in case it got lost in the noise (this is a busy list), and after that
> > let the matter rest if there is no answer".
>
> We don't normally ignore emails, so would not bother with a second
> request.
>
>
> And yet the squeaky wheel does seem to get the grease; and I know from personal
> experience that emails will go unresponded two for weeks, which to a reasonable
> submitter to this list, when many responses are indeed the same day, seems like
> an email that got overlooked.

Yes, but we are explaining it was not overlooked, but rather no one
knows. The odds of a reply are low, and the odds we just ignored it are
even lower. If he does ask a second time for each backpatch, we are
likely to be even less motivated to help.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2024-12-31 20:54:15 Re: PoC: history of recent vacuum/checkpoint runs (using new hooks)
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2024-12-31 20:49:53 Re: Document How Commit Handles Aborted Transactions