Hi Murray, just to give some context about this PR, ASF is one of the organizations involved in Project Glasswing by Anthropic. Security team reached all PMCs a couple of weeks back, asking which projects wanted to participate, so Claude Mythos can be used to scan them, to arise vulnerabilities before they're exploited.
We applied, and the first step is to provide a security model so the AI can look for actual security concerns. Security team also offered the possibilty of generating a draft, in order to discuss, tweak and polish it before we merge into master. So it's more AI giving us a head start to discuss the document, rather than coming up with it from the ground. Hope this gives some background on the PR. Best regards, juan pablo El sáb, 30 may 2026, 3:47, Murray Altheim <[email protected]> escribió: > So let me understand this correctly: the code of this PR was written by an > AI and whose target audience are AIs? > > On 30/05/2026 13:16, potiuk (via GitHub) wrote: > > > > potiuk opened a new pull request, #496: > > URL: https://github.com/apache/jspwiki/pull/496 > > > > ## Summary > > > > This PR adds an initial draft of a project-level security > > threat-model document (`draft-THREAT-MODEL.md`) so that automated > > security scanners running against this repository have a > > maintainer-facing reference for which classes of findings are > > in-scope vs. out-of-scope for the project. > > > > The document follows the rubric format used by several other ASF > > projects piloting improved security-model discoverability for > > agentic scanners. Every claim carries a provenance tag: > > > > - *(documented)* — paraphrased from public artefacts (this repo, > > the project website, the JSPWiki Security and CVE wiki pages), > > cited inline. > > - *(inferred)* — synthesised from code structure or domain > > knowledge; the PMC has not confirmed. > > - *(maintainer)* — confirmed by a JSPWiki PMC member in response > > to this draft. (1 in this initial draft — Juan Pablo's Path-3 + > > scope confirmation from the GLASSWING thread.) > > > > Draft stats: > > > > - ~40 documented claims (incl. the wiki Security + CVE pages, > > folded into the appendix back-map after the initial draft) > > - ~27 inferred claims (each maps to a §14 question) > > - 37 open questions for maintainers in §14, grouped in 6 waves > > (meta + external-artefact reconciliation / SecurityManager / > > XSS + markup parser / auth + attachments / environment + > > side-effects / meta finalization) > > > > §14 is the highest-leverage section: answering each question > > either promotes one *(inferred)* tag to *(maintainer)* or corrects > > the underlying claim. > > > > ## Why "draft-" prefix? > > > > The file is named `draft-THREAT-MODEL.md` rather than > > `SECURITY-THREAT-MODEL.md` because **this is a proposal for the > > PMC to review — please correct, reject, or discuss as needed.** > > Once the PMC ratifies (or substantially edits) the content, the > > file can be renamed in a follow-up PR and a discoverability > > scaffold (`AGENTS.md` → `SECURITY.md` → the model) added so > > scanners can mechanically follow the chain. > > > > ## What this is, and what it is not > > > > This is **not** a security audit. It is a working triage document > > — the reference a triager holds against an inbound report to > > decide whether the report is about a JSPWiki vulnerability or > > about operator misconfiguration / an out-of-scope concern. > > > > JSPWiki's wiki-engine domain (untrusted user-supplied markup > > rendering, optional plugin execution, attachment handling, JAAS > > container-managed auth) makes §3 / §9 / §11a especially load- > > bearing — the model carefully calls out which classes of findings > > the PMC has historically ruled non-issues vs. valid. > > > > The draft was generated by an automated agentic security scan > > being piloted by the ASF Security team; the discoverability work > > is independent of any specific scan run. > > > > ## How to review > > > > 1. **§14 first.** Q1 (back-map of the wiki Security + CVE pages), > > Q9 (the SecurityManager-not-supported question — single > > highest-impact open ruling), and Q37 (§11a population from > > historical XSS-class CVE clusters) are the three most > > load-bearing. > > 2. After that, please skim §3 (out-of-scope) and §13 (triage > > dispositions) — those govern how a vulnerability report would > > be triaged. > > > > Reply edits / corrections inline on the PR, or to the original > > `[email protected]` thread, whichever fits the PMC's workflow. > > > > 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) > > > > > > > > -- > > ........................................................................... > Murray Altheim <murray18 at altheim dot com> = = === > http://www.altheim.com/murray/ === > === > = = > === > In the evening > The rice leaves in the garden > Rustle in the autumn wind > That blows through my reed hut. > -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu > > >
