Thanks Ben for following the incompat process and for the detailed email. It makes sense to me, the plan is sound, and I plan to vote yes when we hold the official vote in next week's steering committee meeting. On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:35 PM Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 4:11 PM Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> This email proposes upgrading the llhttp package in EPEL9 from 6.0.10 to >> 8.1.1, which would break the ABI and bump the SONAME version, under the >> EPEL Incompatible Upgrades Policy[1]. >> >> The llhttp package is a C library (transpiled from TypeScript) that >> provides the low-level HTTP support for NodeJS and for python-aiohttp. >> Currently, only python-aiohttp depends on the llhttp package in EPEL9. >> >> Versions of llhttp prior to 8.1.1 are affected by CVE-2023-30589[2], an >> HTTP request smuggling vulnerability rated 7.7 HIGH in CVSS v3 and rated >> Moderate by Red Hat. The GitHub advisory for llhttp is >> GHSA-cggh-pq45-6h9x[3]; the advisory for python-aiohttp is >> GHSA-45c4-8wx5-qw6w[4]. Upstream for python-aiohttp fixed this by >> updating llhttp (which they bundle, but we unbundle) in release 3.8.5. >> >> I am not comfortable attempting to backport the fix to an older release >> of llhttp. My preferred solution would be to update llhttp to 8.1.1[5] >> and (in the same side tag) update python-aiohttp to 3.8.5[6]. The ABI >> break in llhttp would only affect python-aiohttp; the python-aiohttp >> update itself is compatible (by upstream intent, and verified in >> COPR[7]); and a number of packages that depend on python-aiohttp would >> benefit from the fix. >> >> If this exception request is not approved, my fallback plan is to >> propose rebuilding python-aiohttp in EPEL9 with AIOHTTP_NO_EXTENSIONS=1, >> which would convert it to a pure-Python package. This is a documented >> mitigation, but comes with potentially serious performance regressions, >> again affecting a number of dependent packages. The llhttp package would >> become a leaf package and would remain unpatched. >> >> The same incompatible update was approved by FESCo for Fedora 37[8]. >> >> The purpose of this email is to document and explain the proposed >> update, to begin the minimum one-week discussion period mandated by the >> EPEL Incompatible Upgrades Policy, and to request that the update be >> added to the agenda for an upcoming EPEL meeting. >> >> [1] >> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/#process_for_incompatible_upgrades >> >> [2] https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-30589 >> >> [3] https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-cggh-pq45-6h9x >> >> [4] >> https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/security/advisories/GHSA-45c4-8wx5-qw6w >> >> [5] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/llhttp/pull-request/14 >> >> [6] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-aiohttp/pull-request/26 >> >> [7] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/music/aiohttp-epel9/packages/ >> >> [8] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3049 > > > Thank you for the nice write-up. > > I have created an EPEL issue. Not really for discussion but more for voting and make sure this is on the meeting agendas. > https://pagure.io/epel/issue/241 > > Troy > > _______________________________________________ > epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- Carl George _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
