Difference between revisions of "Security Advisory"
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
|none | |none | ||
|ECDSA signing uses SHA1 hash for signatures | |ECDSA signing uses SHA1 hash for signatures | ||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Reviews == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Security Reviews are for when the development team analysis a potential issue and reports on it. If some action needed to be taken, it would be an advisory instead. So reviews show that something was considered and then determined to be a non-issue for Snowblossom. | ||
| + | |||
| + | {| class="wikitable" | ||
| + | !ID | ||
| + | !Date | ||
| + | !Versions | ||
| + | !Severity | ||
| + | !Description | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |[[Security/SR-1|SR-1]] | ||
| + | |2022.04.20 | ||
| + | |All | ||
| + | |none | ||
| + | |Review of CVE-2022-21449: Psychic Signatures in Java | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 03:55, 21 April 2022
Advisories
| ID | Date | Versions | Severity | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SA-1 | 2020.10.30 | All | none | ECDSA signing uses SHA1 hash for signatures |
Reviews
Security Reviews are for when the development team analysis a potential issue and reports on it. If some action needed to be taken, it would be an advisory instead. So reviews show that something was considered and then determined to be a non-issue for Snowblossom.
| ID | Date | Versions | Severity | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SR-1 | 2022.04.20 | All | none | Review of CVE-2022-21449: Psychic Signatures in Java |
