Thanks for the interest Daniel!

>> Would you like to participate as a contributor?
> What does this entail?

That's a good question, to be seen. As a part of the pilot project we will 
need:

   - Try out LFX Security 2.0 and configure it for some of our projects
   - Explore options for filtering out false positives, find a solution for 
   the Jenkins project taking its scale and needs
   - Try out other features like license analysis
   - Document the implementation for other maintainers
   - Keep evaluation notes and share feedback with Snyk/LFX Security. If we 
   experience blockers, multiple iterations might be required

Note from the discussion: It is unlikely that we will be able to use the 
standard Snyk's GitHub integration via GitHub App. We will likely need to 
integrate scanning submissions into our Jenkins pipelines (there is a Snyk 
plugin FTR) or to use GitHub actions. Reason - GitHub Integration cannot 
handle custom Bills of Materials which will be supported by the LFX 
Security 2.0 API (actually, by the Snyk backend).

> Re licenses -- Is this something we're actively looking at as well, or 
rather secondary. FWIW I can think of these use cases: That it's actually 
open source; that it's compatible (no MIT plugin bundling GPL dependencies 
or similar weirdness); that it's all OSI approved per governance document. 
Anything else?

Yes, looks good to me. I would rather prefer to avoid some licenses where 
compatibility is disputed, e.g. traditional AGPL concerns.


On Monday, May 3, 2021 at 9:35:17 PM UTC+2 Daniel Beck wrote:

> Thanks again for driving this, Oleg!
>
>
> > On 3. May 2021, at 19:14, Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > The proposal is to start the pilot from a small list of the repositories 
> controlled by the pilot project participants: Jenkins core, its libraries, 
> and some plugins from maintainers who are interested to participate in the 
> pilot project.
> > 
> > Call for feedback:
> > • Would you approve doing an official pilot project together with Snyk 
> and LFX Security?
>
> Yes, definitely.
>
> > • Would you like to participate as a contributor?
>
> What does this entail?
>
> > • Would you like your plugin to participate in the pilot project?
>
> Yes (although my plugins tend not to have interesting dependencies so it's 
> probably not that interesting).
>
>
> Re private PRs and security process (minute 25-28 in the transcripts, 
> again around 0:51) -- I don't really see a need to handle dependency 
> updates in private in most cases, as all information that is based on is 
> usually public anyway (CVEs in dependencies as well as dependency 
> declarations). Additionally, vulnerabilities in plugins don't necessarily 
> mean we're vulnerable (or that the metadata is correct to begin with), and 
> how to exploit it isn't often obvious either. So I don't feel strongly 
> about keeping such content private. What we prepare in jenkinsci-cert in 
> private is almost exclusively fixes for exploitable vulnerabilities 
> originating in Jenkins code.
>
> Re CVE ignore list and such -- would like to see a plan (perhaps with the 
> custom graph API that pre-filters plugin dependencies) how to deal with 
> transitive plugin dependencies: Plugin X depends on plugin Y which bundles 
> library Z. The maintainer of X doesn't really care about Z being outdated. 
> (The same applies to "core Y" -- no need for a tool to tell plugin 
> maintainers about core dependencies being outdated.) While we could dump 
> all Jenkins CVEs into a giant ignore list, that wouldn't take care of this 
> problem.
>
> Re licenses -- Is this something we're actively looking at as well, or 
> rather secondary. FWIW I can think of these use cases: That it's actually 
> open source; that it's compatible (no MIT plugin bundling GPL dependencies 
> or similar weirdness); that it's all OSI approved per governance document. 
> Anything else?
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/bb188d8e-1a09-4837-84a9-b82c62d3c4fbn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to