Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Anthony G. Basile" <basile@××××××××××××××.edu>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] why is the security team running around p.masking packages
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 08:04:22
Message-Id: 82208db8-c826-62a5-1775-32b83abdfffd@opensource.dyc.edu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] why is the security team running around p.masking packages by Aaron Bauman
1 On 7/5/16 10:43 PM, Aaron Bauman wrote:
2 >
3 > That CVE request was not from Ago. It was from the respective OSS ML
4 > referenced in the URL field of the bug report. Not to mention, you as a
5 > maintainer were able to discover another issue with that package and fix
6 > it.
7 >
8
9 You never bothered to follow that OSS ML link. For others reading this
10 email, here is the link:
11
12 http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2013/02/24/5
13
14 Here's a copy of that entire email:
15
16 <email>
17
18 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:00:57 +0100
19 From: Agostino Sarubbo <ago@××××××.org>
20 To: oss-security@××××××××××××××.com
21 Subject: CVE request: monkeyd world-readable logdir
22
23 Monkeyd, a small, fast, and scalable web server, produces, at least on
24 gentoo a world-readable log.
25
26 # ls /var/log/monkeyd/master.log -la
27 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Feb 24 19:56 /var/log/monkeyd/master.log
28
29 Upstream site: http://www.monkey-project.com/
30
31 --
32 Agostino Sarubbo
33 Gentoo Linux Developer
34
35 </email>
36
37
38 That is what you p.masked on. That's it. Neither you nor Ago really
39 understood the issue with monkeyd's logging. There were no followup
40 emails and no CVE was assigned. Its junk.
41
42 By both initiating and following through on such low quality bugs, you
43 are damaging the reputation of the security project.
44
45
46 >> I personally would like to see only QA oversee any forced p.maskings and
47 >> have the security team pass that task over to QA for review. By forced
48 >> I mean without the cooperation of the maintainer.
49 >>
50 >
51 > Again, no one else has had an issue with this except you. The one who
52 > doesn't want to cooperate.
53
54 Having people review your work is a good idea, no? So in cases where
55 security wants to touch a packages, why not ping the maintainer first
56 and in case of a dispute or no response, escalate the issue to QA who
57 will review the problem and act.
58
59 Are you okay with this change in procedure?
60
61
62 --
63 Anthony G. Basile, Ph. D.
64 Chair of Information Technology
65 D'Youville College
66 Buffalo, NY 14201
67 (716) 829-8197

Replies