Re: Making Fedora secure - Package exit policy for security

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 08/01/2018 01:41 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 10:33:11AM +0530, Huzaifa Sidhpurwala wrote:
>> On 07/31/2018 08:33 PM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>>
>>>> 1. If a CRITICAL or IMPORTANT security issue is open against a package
>>>> in Fedora-X and by the time X is EOL and the issue is not addressed,
>>>> proactively remove the package from X+1
>>>> 2. If a MODERATE or LOW security issue is open against a package in
>>>> Fedora -X and by the time X+! is EOL, the issue is not addressed, remove
>>>> it from X+2
>>>
>>> I don't think this is practical, we'll lose half the distro (are at least 
>>> large chunks).
>>>
>>> Initially, such a proposal may be possible if generally limited to leaf 
>>> packages.
>>>
>>
>> So, i did some analysis of the number of packages which would be
>> actually removed if we allowed this policy. I generated a list of open
>> CVE bugs against X-2 which in this case is Fedora-26 and i got the
>> following list:
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&classification=Fedora&keywords=SecurityTracking%2C%20&keywords_type=allwords&list_id=9198136&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&version=26
>>
>> If you extract the list of components ,it yields 57 unique components.
>> out of that components like xorg-server etc would probably be in the
>> critical list.
> 
> binutils is in the list, and without that, we won't have a distro at all !
> 
Yes, that is why the concept of critical pkgs, binutils and others would
obviously be on that list, which means, they cannot be dropped from the
distro.

> Chances are though, that the bugs were fixed in upstream and so available
> in newer Fedora version, so merely F26 left unfixed and the BZ status
> outdated.  I imagine this probably applies to most open CVEs against
> RPMs which have an active upstream community. Its the ones with dead
> upstream that and not fixed in Fedora that would be the serious concern.
>
If Newer fedora is fixed via rebase, the older trackers should be closed
with appropriate resolution and comments. I am not asking all the
security issues to be resolved in each version of fedora, i am merely
asking for proper bookkeeping so that our users can make an informed
decision.

> Regards,
> Daniel
> 


-- 
Huzaifa Sidhpurwala / Red Hat Product Security Team
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/FENPZGAIFU5XSVXKQVNBZ2J457UHOSNV/




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux