再保险:[CVENEW]新CVE罐:2017/04/23晚7:00;数= 1

主教法冠,这并不CVE的工作大局。太阳,2017年4月23日,cve@mitre.org写道::= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =:名称:cve - 2014 - 9681:状态:候选人:网址:http://cve.mitre.org/cgi - bin/cvename.cgi?name=cve - 2014 - 9681最终决定::阶段性裁决::修改:建议:分配:20150212:类别:::* *拒绝* *::不使用此候选人数量。ConsultIDs:没有。原因:由其CNA:候选人被撤回。进一步调查表明:这并不是一个安全问题。注:没有。2015-02-12,斜接这个任务:http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/533:Procmail是另一个程序,不顾一切地白名单TZ使用cve - 2014 - 9681 Procmail中的类似问题。现在,跳转到今天,从大概保留拒绝的条目。看着NVD我们看到历史日期比斜方提供:https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve - 2014 - 9681原始发布日期:04/23/2017最后修改:斜方一直以来04/23/2017封锁了档案网站通过机器人。txt,长大在列表中,我们不能证明这是保留昨天和今天拒绝了,但它是很清楚的。所以…这使得两个明显的问题:1。这是2014年的一项任务,在oss-sec,公开披露。然而,ID是保留这么长时间。为什么?2。今晚,ID突然拒绝不是“安全问题”,从斜接,没有额外的信息,没有回复旧的线程,没有出处的决定“不是问题”。为什么? I fully understand #1 due to past MITRE issues. But today, the sudden change without information does not make sense, and does not seem appropriate. I'd like to get more information on this, not just about CVE-2014-9681, but the general process that led to this decision. Thank you, Brian