UPD: The Jenkins Governance meeting approved official participation in the 
Pilot project.
Approved by: Ulli Hafner, Gavin Mogan, Ewelina Wilkosz, Daniel Beck, 
Baptiste Mathus, Mark Waite (+ Olivier I'd guess)
Thanks everyone for the feedback!


On Wednesday, May 5, 2021 at 7:28:36 PM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just a quick update, we will be setting up a shared Slack channel in the 
> CDF workspace. Once it is ready, we can use it for conversations.
> Pending ticket to the CDF: 
> https://github.com/cdfoundation/foundation/issues/330 
>
> BR, Oleg
>
> On Tuesday, May 4, 2021 at 9:30:06 AM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote:
>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>> For experiments, it might make sense to register Jenkins Infrastructure 
>> as the second organization. I do not anticipate major overlap between 
>> configs taking different technology stacks.
>> Once Snyk adds support for multiple GitHub orgs, we can explore our 
>> options. M<aybe it won't be even a problem since we can unlikely use the 
>> standard GitHub App integration anyway (see my response to Daniel)
>>
>> If you want to start with the Jenkins Infra org, I think you can do it 
>> even now on LFX Security 1.x && standard GitHUb integration. Then it can be 
>> migrated to 2x.
>> Let the LFX Security team know if you want one to be created.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Oleg
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 8:46 AM 'Olblak' via Jenkins Developers <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Oleg,
>>>
>>> Thanks for driving this.
>>> Once we are allowed to have a second Github Organization, I would be 
>>> very interested to experiment with it for the jenkins-infra organization. 
>>>
>>> On Monday, 3 May 2021 at 22:24:44 UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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 a topic in the 
>>> Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-dev/lIeGyefi1Y4/unsubscribe.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>>> [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/496a4b3a-0489-4783-b06b-1f27fd369bcan%40googlegroups.com
>>>  
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/496a4b3a-0489-4783-b06b-1f27fd369bcan%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>

-- 
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/57b4a97a-945b-4180-ab33-a1a281689c9en%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to