arXiv:2601.22196cs.SE
Linux Kernel Recency Matters, CVE Severity Doesn't, and History Fades
Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.
Abstract
In 2024, the Linux kernel became its own Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) Numbering Authority (CNA), formalizing how kernel vulnerabilities are identified and tracked. We analyze the anatomy and dynamics of kernel CVEs using metadata, associated commits, and patch latency to understand what drives patching. Results show that severity and Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) metrics have a negligible association with patch latency, whereas kernel recency is a reasonable predictor in survival models. Kernel developers fix newer kernels sooner, while older ones retain unresolved CVEs. Commits introducing vulnerabilities are typically broader and more complex than their fixes, though often only approximate reconstructions of development history. The Linux kernel remains a unique open-source project -- its CVE process is no exception.
The majority of vulnerabilities are in newly committed lines of code. This has been shown again and again [1] [2] From a marketing standpoint Anthropic is showing that they're able to direct 'compute' to find vulnerabilities where human time/cost is not efficient or effective.…
jryioView on HNParent context