Hi,
I'd like to give my input too.
3.6.4 is IMHO not an option since there is change of behavior that would
come as a surprise for some. I know of smaller organisations where
running nexus, jenkins etc on HTTP is fine and switching to SSL is not
trivial since they do not have proper DevOps or certificate management
in place.
3.7.0 is controversial since it would not contain "advertised features".
3.8.0+ is better, even if it will cause some surprises for people who'd
believe that features not delivered in 3.7 would then at least be
available in 3.8...
And I think we should always be pragmatic. Semver is a scheme that can
be interpreted/implemented in different ways. I don't see skipping a
number as a big deal.
Best regards
Jesper Udby
On 29/03/2021 09.03, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
Hi,
I kind of agree intranet is as secure as the internet (ie a lot of attacks
done last years were done on intranets). yes you are in a local vpc not
accessible from the outside but it is also where hackers try to enter first
since then it is open bar for them.
That said it is very common to use http as a quick serving too - thinking
to trainings and hacking sessions where a tomcat serves a local m2 for
example.
I guess this all lead to the fact we need to support HTTP anyway and
enable/document how to still use it in the coming version (and not prevent
it in a hardcoded fashion).
In terms of security it would be left to the user to enable it explicitly -
defaults being secured, exactly as the 0-day vulnerability got fixed in all
softwares.
Sounds more than relevant to me to enable that case while it is not the
default.
That said, having this kind of toggle pushes to 3.6.4 more than all others
by design then, no?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
Le lun. 29 mars 2021 à 08:51, Som Lima <[email protected]> a écrit :
I thought we were talking about computer programming algorithms.
Social engineering is outside the scope of the discussion on the subject
of the algorithm devised in the invisible ( to API developers), network
layer implementation.
The scope of discussion is that the intranet is a tightly coupled comm
system therefore secure by design.
Imagine a couple holding each other tightly so no intruder, (third party)
can come in between and interfere.
Meanwhile the internet (loosely coupled) due to physical limitations could
not be implemented using the same algorithm.
It was left to users to work out the security which can be done using
encryption (HTTPS) as one means of security. Other strategies are also
available. Only the CHECKSUM was supplied as means of data integrity by the
network Gods.
Anybody want to talk about intraprocess (tight coupling) and Interprocess
(loose coupling) ?
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 15:39 Markus KARG, <[email protected]> wrote:
Nonsense. It is common sense that most criminal acts are spawned from
within the local network, due to social engineering.
-Markus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Som Lima [mailto:[email protected]]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. März 2021 15:06
An: Maven Developers List
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Next release version: 3.6.4, 3.7.0, 3.8.0 or other
BTW there should be an option to still use unsecure http as many people
run http in their LANs.
I could be wrong but I think the intranet is a tightly coupled comm
system
therefore it is secure by design.
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 13:31 Markus KARG, <[email protected]> wrote:
We should not do any tricks or unexpected behavior but just stick with
SemVer.
If there is a need for a security fix, it has to be 3.6.4 and BTW there
should be an option to still use unsecure http as many people run http
in
their LANs.
If it contains backwards-compatible features, it has to be 3.7.0.
If it breaks backwards-compatibility, it has to be 4.0.0.
In no case it can be 3.8.0.
If mvnw was proposed for 3.7 but is not here now, then we either have
to
wait with 3.7.0, or we have to tell people that we move mvnw to 3.8 or
4.0.
I do not see a need for any discussion at all, as SemVer is pretty
clear
about the sole correct answer.
-Markus
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. März 2021 11:47
An: Maven Developers List
Betreff: [DISCUSS] Next release version: 3.6.4, 3.7.0, 3.8.0 or other
Hi all,
Before we reroll the failed 3.8.0 I'd like we discuss openly the next
versioning since it seems we didn't reach a consensus yet and trying to
not
create too much friction for users and in the community.
As a reminder the only feature the release will get is to prevent HTTP
repo
(in favor of HTTPS ones). In that regard it is a breaking change if
users
rely on HTTP repo but a security fix (I don't come back on the HTTP ->
HTTPS move IT ecosystem got recently here).
So it seems there are multiple versioning options:
1. 3.6.4: seems natural since it is a security fix, enables companies
to
get this fix respecting a project versioning policy without having to
upgrade and avoids us to have to maintain 3.6 + 3.7/3.8 and soon 4.x.
Indeed it requires a very well documented paragraph about this change
and
how to workaround it (local proxy/mirror is a trivial one for example)
but
it will be the case whatever version we pick anyway IMHO.
2. 3.7.0: since it is a breaking change it can seem natural too (but
has
the pitfall to likely require a backport in 3.6 anyway, due to the
versioning policies which can prevent some users to upgrade to a 3.7)
3. 3.8.0: was the vote, seems the rational was that originally we
targetting mvnw in 3.7 and since we didn't make it 3.8 was used. Have
to
admit I'm not sure of this reasoning more than that (cause for me if we
don't have a planned feature we can either try to push/wait for it or
postpone it but not skip a version due to that) so if anyone wants to
complete the reasoning here it would be great.
Indeed my preference is for 3.6.4 which has the most advantages for
everyone and no additional drawbacks compared to 3.7 or 3.8 options
until
we try to push to get mvnw in which would mean 3.7 becomes more natural
(and likely imply a 3.6.x maintenance version).
Goal of this thread is to feel the overall trend and see if we can
refine
the proposals (for example: can we drop 3.8 one and only keep 3.7 and
3.6
or - best - can we refine it to a single version after some exchanges).
If we keep a few proposals after some days, what about a vote where the
majority wins - we would just need to define how we count,
bindings/committers/all (my preference being last one indeed)?
Romain Manni-Bucau
@rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog
<https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
<
https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
