Hi,

I have merged the pr and do a vulnerability check. It seems we need to bump 
netty in next version.

Best
--------------
Xinyu Tan

On 2025/12/23 01:43:12 Xinyu Tan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have fixed all the reviews[1]! Please check at your spare time.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/apache/ratis/pull/1328
> 
> Best
> ------------------
> Xinyu Tan
> 
> On 2025/12/15 17:11:41 Tsz Wo Sze wrote:
> > I agree that we do not have to hide the reports, since the reports contain
> > the publicly known vulnerabilities but not newly discovered
> > vulnerabilities. This kind of report is already available in maven repo and
> > other web sites.
> > 
> > Xinyu, thanks a lot for starting the discussion and working on it!
> > 
> > Tsz-Wo
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 5:04 AM Xinyu Tan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi, Attila
> > >
> > > Yes you are right!
> > >
> > > Since Apache Ratis is an open-source project, anyone can already scan the
> > > codebase using vulnerability scanning tools. In that sense, publishing 
> > > such
> > > a report does not materially increase risk, because attackers who have the
> > > capability to find vulnerabilities do not need to rely on this report in
> > > order to discover issues.
> > >
> > > From a community perspective, having this report can be valuable as a
> > > pre-release checklist item. It would help ensure that before every release
> > > we do not have any publicly known CVEs, and it could serve as an 
> > > additional
> > > quality control step ahead of voting on a release.
> > >
> > > Best
> > > -------------
> > > Xinyu Tan
> > >
> > > On 2025/12/15 10:08:43 Attila Doroszlai wrote:
> > > > > Regarding the first point, the new workflow checks vulnerabilities
> > > against the NVD, which is more comprehensive than the current scanning 
> > > that
> > > only uses GitHub Advisory data. The NVD offers a broader and more
> > > up-to-date set of vulnerabilities.
> > > >
> > > > Nice.
> > > >
> > > > > As for visibility, I tested it and found that only committers can
> > > trigger the workflow. However, GitHub doesn't currently support 
> > > restricting
> > > visibility of workflow results[1].
> > > >
> > > > On second thought that's OK.  Visibility is important for security
> > > > issues within the project itself.  I guess anyone can perform this
> > > > dependency scan locally, so hiding the results does not make much
> > > > difference.
> > > >
> > > > I'll check the PR.
> > > >
> > > > -Attila
> > > >
> > >
> > 
> 

Reply via email to