RFC: Updating the Binutils SECURITY.txt document

Project / Subsystem

binutils / rfc

Date

2026-05-06

Proposer

Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>

Source type

public_inbox

Consensus

Proposed

Sentiment

/10

Technical tradeoffs

  • Reduces noise from automated fuzzing, but may miss subtle vulnerabilities.
  • Requires a clear definition of 'trust boundary' to avoid ambiguity.

All attributes

project
binutils
subsystem
rfc
patch_id
discussion_id
87qzno3ip4.fsf@redhat.com
source_type
public_inbox
title
RFC: Updating the Binutils SECURITY.txt document
headline
RFC: Update Binutils SECURITY.txt to Exclude Fuzzer-Induced Crashes
tldr
Binutils SECURITY.txt will clarify that crashes from fuzzed binaries, without a breach of trust boundary, are not security bugs.
proposer
Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
consensus
Proposed
outcome
proposed
sentiment_score
technical_tradeoffs
  • Reduces noise from automated fuzzing, but may miss subtle vulnerabilities.
  • Requires a clear definition of 'trust boundary' to avoid ambiguity.
series_id
series_role
standalone
series_parts
[]
tags
  • binutils
  • security
  • fuzzing
  • CVE
bugzilla_url
date
2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z

RFC: Updating the Binutils SECURITY.txt document

Nick Clifton proposes updating the binutils SECURITY.txt document to clarify that crashes caused by fuzzed input, without demonstrating a breach of a trust boundary (e.g., code execution as another user), will not be considered security bugs. They also want to clarify that binutils tools are not intended for network services, so denial-of-service attacks are not relevant. This aims to reduce the number of reported CVEs for fuzzer-induced crashes.