<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [JSC] crash via `new Function("}{")`"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163748#c7">Comment # 7</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [JSC] crash via `new Function("}{")`"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163748">bug 163748</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:bfulgham@webkit.org" title="Brent Fulgham <bfulgham@webkit.org>"> <span class="fn">Brent Fulgham</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=163748#c6">comment #6</a>)
<span class="quote">> It’s not so much policy but simply a practical consideration. There are
> *lots* of crashing bugs and I don’t think we treat them all as sensitive
> security bugs. I believe we try to distinguish exploitable crashes from ones
> that are simply an inconvenience.</span >
Exactly. We try to handle bugs that we judge to allow true "exploits" under our more severe 'Security' classification.
While crashes and "eat CPU spinning in a loop" bugs are super annoying, and are things we want to mitigate where possible, they don't rise to quite the same level for our purposes.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>