Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Robert Buchholz <rbu@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: security@g.o, forum-mods@g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] RFC: GLSA-2, a new DTD for GLSAs
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 14:19:57
Message-Id: 200905261619.50768.rbu@gentoo.org
1 Hello,
2
3 the Security Team would like to create a new DTD for our GLSAs. GLSAs
4 are distributed via our web site and the tree. Their format is defined
5 by a DTD.
6
7 When the format was initially defined in 2004, some use cases were
8 considered that never got implemented or used. Other use cases only
9 came up later. For this reason, we want to update the GLSA for the
10 needs of 2009. Since this includes changes that make existing GLSAs
11 invalid we are going to introduce a new DTD called glsa-2.dtd.
12
13 I would like to announce the changes we want to introduce. If you have
14 any feedback, please speak up. This can include feature requests. After
15 this discussion, we would like to freeze the DTD and ask all consumers
16 of GLSA XML files (such as package managers) to implement said changes.
17 The first GLSA using the new DTD will be at the earliest six weeks
18 after the DTD was frozen. Once the new GLSA format is in use, we are
19 going to convert some or all of the existing GLSAs to use the format.
20
21 Find the existing DTD here:
22 http://dev.gentoo.org/~rbu/glsa-2/glsa.dtd
23
24 The new DTD here:
25 http://dev.gentoo.org/~rbu/glsa-2/glsa-2.dtd
26
27 And a diff between them here:
28 http://dev.gentoo.org/~rbu/glsa-2/glsa-2.dtd.diff
29
30 Here's a list of changes:
31
32 (-) Dropping of the product type. GLSAs will be used solely to announce
33 security issues in the Portage Tree. The "infrastructure"
34 and "informational" product type are not needed and the type
35 attribute will be dropped altogether.
36 (-) Dropping of service tag. Same rationale as above, if we
37 drop "infrastructure", we do not need the service tag.
38 (-) Drop the 'name' attribute to unaffected. This is not implemented in
39 glsa-check or Portage 2.2 and it was never part of our Policy to mix
40 GLSAs with package moves or similar.
41 (+) SLOT support. An implied attribute 'slot' to the 'vulnerable'
42 and 'unaffected' tag will be introduced. This limits the scope of
43 the range specifiers to ebuilds in the specified slot. The default
44 is '*' meaning all slots. [1]
45 (+) Addition of a 'count' attribute to the 'revised' tag. We stop
46 formatting revision dates as 'May 26, 2009: 03' and use
47 '<revised count="3">2009-05-26</revised>' instead.
48 (*) UTF-8 support. We would like to release GLSAs containing UTF-8
49 characters in places where they make sense (that is, not package
50 names, version information, etc.). Please check whether your tools
51 support this.
52
53 A GLSA XML file containing said changes, including UTF-8 characters, is
54 up here:
55 http://dev.gentoo.org/~rbu/glsa-2/glsa-200012-34.txt
56
57
58
59 Robert
60
61 [1] This does not allow for undefined situations if you employ the
62 following algorithm: An ebuild is vulnerable if falls into any of the
63 ranges specified by the 'vulnerable' tags unless it also falls into any
64 of the ranges specified by the 'unaffected' tags.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: GLSA-2, a new DTD for GLSAs "Tiziano Müller" <dev-zero@g.o>