On 2017-03-12 00:54, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> 1. From this proposal it looks like the Security Project Lead
>> obtains a lot of power and a lot of responsibility, maybe too much
>> for a single person to handle.
>>
>> While the Deputy may be assigned, this still gives all power to
>> single hands. Maybe it will be better to establish something like
>> the Security Project Council (SPC)? E.g. three project members may
>> be elected to this SPC, so that all serious decisions will require
>> some team agreement from at least 2 SPC members. This way the
>> Deputy will not be needed as well.
>>
> The thinking here is that the project lead is the responsible party. Any
> ambiguity can still be escalated to the Gentoo Council, but someone
> needs to be responsible from the side of the Gentoo Security Project.

I completely disagree with that.

The whole powerful lead/deputy thing is going in the wrong direction.

We don't need that. Security project is nothing special and doesn't need
a strong lead with such a power to rule the entire Gentoo project.

In general, every full member in the project should be equal. So I would
list them all as confidential contact for example. This would lower the
chance to compromise a member because an attacker wouldn't know who will
get contacted. If we would only have one contact (like the lead) this
would be a high-value target.
Because the security project has some inactive/dev away members the team
maybe want to select some main contacts instead. But this is up to the
team/project and doesn't belong in any GLEP.


-- 
Regards,
Thomas


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to