On Jun 1, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Jun 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Denis Gervalle wrote:
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 00:52, Ludovic Dubost
<ludovic(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
I'll throw in my James Bond culture here..
The rule should be based on the "need-to-know" rule.
We should let people that need to know the information towards the goals we
are setting for this list.
The goal of this list is at this point to allow people to discuss solutions
to security issues in order to fix them while not making XWiki unusable.
I don't think it is at this point to inform "admins" of potential security
issue (that should be another annoucement list).
So it should be about letting in people that prove they want to help. The
lesser it seems they will help the more we need to trust them !
It's clearly a case by case basis
I don't think we should worry about not having enough people in this list.
Working on security issues is hard and requires dedication, so it's already
a happy few list.
We'll recognize them very quickly.
Ludovic
I am very +1 with Ludovic, and what has been publish on
XWiki.org is
sufficient for me.
For me too. The fact that it says "contributing" should prevent casual
lurkers.
If anyone not fitting Vincent's rules should
be in for
some other reason, a committers'vote should do, else, I not sure it is
required, an announcement on the security list should be enough.
Should committers do something to join ?
I think Alex has aded us by default. Let me try to send an email to see if it works...
They're not added. I'm adding them.
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks
-Vincent
> Denis
>
>
>>
>> Le 31/05/10 18:53, Caleb James DeLisle a écrit :
>>
>>
>>> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 31, 2010, at 6:18 PM, Caleb James DeLisle wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 31, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Alex Busenius wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The new mailing list security(a)xwiki.org was created. All
core
>>>>>>> commiters
>>>>>>> will be on this list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is *not* an announcement list, it is meant for
technical
>>>>>>> discussions about security issues. However, everyone can
write to
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> mailing list, e.g. to report security issues (mails will be
reviewed
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> the administrator first).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If somebody else is interested in contributing to discussions
on that
>>>>>>> list, he or she should write a mail on the dev-list asking
for access.
>>>>>>> If the commiters agree (meaning that nobody is -1 on it,
similar to a
>>>>>>> proposal) this person will get access.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We also need to define who can get access. IMO:
>>>>>> - persons who have submitted security issues in jira
>>>>>> - persons who've submitted security patches
>>>>>> - persons who have been contributing to xwiki for a long time
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These seem like nice guidelines but must we disallow people who
we all
>>>>> know
>>>>> will help the discussion because they don't meet the
requirements?
>>>>>
>>>>> IMO we can't define what makes someone unsuitable for the list
but will
>>>>> know
>>>>> them when we see them.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's much better to have a list of examples of what constitutes a
valid
>>>> request than not having it. This is useful not only for committers to
vote
>>>> but also for the person who ask so that he knows how to qualify.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise voting is about thin air... and you're going to hurt
people
>>>> Caleb (+ generate unnecessary requests, votes and rejections).
>>>>
>>>> Take this example:
>>>>
>>>> I'm someone who has installed XE at my company. I want to be sure I
know
>>>> about security issues and I'm even ok to take part in the discussion
about
>>>> these issues. I sent a mail to the dev list asking to be on that list.
Note
>>>> that I have not sent any prior email to the list but I have participated
>>>> (for ex) to other open source projects.
>>>>
>>>> I have no problem defining what the list is for and what it's not
for.
>>> "This list is not here to provide information about exploits and how to
>>> deal with them, only ask to join if you wish to help"
>>>
>>> If this hypothetical admin is also a programmer and knows a lot about
>>> security patterns
>>> then we would be wise to let them in.
>>>
>>>
>>> How ar you going to reject me or accept me? And if you reject me you need
>>>> to give me a reason. What reason will it be?
>>>>
>>>> As you can see you'll have to list the reasons anyway and it's
much
>>>> better to do it upfront (even if the list is not complete) than not.
>>>>
>>>> Also if you reject me I'll be offended. I'm not a script kid.
I'm someone
>>>> honest and serious. How dare you reject me! This is not a real open
source
>>>> project! ;)
>>>>
>>>> What if somebody fits all of the requirements but has a history of
>>> becoming bitter and publishing
>>> security info about projects. Then if we reject them they will be that
>>> much more angry because they
>>> fit all of the rules.
>>>
>>> What about somebody who gets on the list by meeting the qualifications
>>> then never sends anything, just (presumably)
>>> logging the discussion?
>>>
>>> One final thought is we're probably making a mountain out of a mole
hill,
>>> regulating who sees the secret jira issues has never been much of a problem.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also it seems that rules stop people from doing the right thing while
>>>>> people with bad intentions are usually more motivated and will thus
find
>>>>> a way
>>>>> around the rule.
>>>>>
>>>>> My +1 is for a case by case basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Caleb
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 05/26/2010 01:02 PM, Alex Busenius wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello devs,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I propose to introduce a security mailing list
(security(a)xwiki.org)
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> discuss details of security issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This list should be private, with only committers and
trusted
>>>>>>>> contributors having read and write access. Anyone who
proved his good
>>>>>>>> intentions on the dev-list and bug tracker should be able
to get
>>>>>>>> access
>>>>>>>> to security-list through the usual vote procedure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The purpose of this list is to give a safe place to
discuss details
>>>>>>>> open
>>>>>>>> security issues without giving all script kiddies in the
world
>>>>>>>> examples
>>>>>>>> to write exploits. The discussions should be kept on this
private
>>>>>>>> list
>>>>>>>> until the corresponding fix is released.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alex