Comment by shakna

> I have trouble understanding the thought process that ends up basically ignoring the maintainers' duty to make sure that the code being committed doesn't endanger security or lives because they assumed that everything was 'cool'. The security posture in this critical infrastructure is deficient and no one wants to actually address it.

They're banning a group known to be bad actors. And proactively tearing out the history of commits related to those known actors, before reviewing each commit.

That seems like the kernel team are taking a proactive stance on the security side of this. The LKML thread also talks about more stringent requirements that they're going to bring in, which was already going to be brought up at the next kernel conference.

None of these things seem like ignoring any of the security issues.