Issue closed for myself - keep as-is for the wiki security lockdown Had a discussion with Roger just now that jogged my brain (I jogged in the forest a couple days ago) - and I completely forgot about zero-day exploits and the effect that exposing any vulnerability will play in the future - I recommend we continue to keep our vulnerabilities under wraps - (as per chained-multi-level exploit use-case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet level protection)
I also subscribe to the ACL/SecurityGroup model for AWS and Azure where we should assume a rogue pod gets in and should be defined by specific access/port/network rules for comms between microservices. Therefore the discussion on threat access in the wiki and the tool to generate them are 2 separate issues - and we keep access to our reports locked down. On the side - if there was a way we could run the magic word "run-sonar" on developer unmerged reviews (without having to merge the code) - this would be good - as we are going through multiple cycles of test/merge where the CLM numbers go up/down as we progress. Thank you /michael -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] via RT <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 10:41 AM To: Michael O'Brien <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Prudence Au <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [ONAP Helpdesk #61994] [linuxfoundation.org #61994] RE: [onap-tsc] Allow non-PTLs to view/edit the CLM security wiki pages #clm #security +1 to Michael's comments .... As I see it, there are 2 serious issues with the current IQ tool: 1) The limitations on sharing the report places a large burden on PTLs and committers, since we're the only ones with access to the source report. We can mitigate that to some extent in many cases by things like what we're doing in odlparent - namely, enforcing standard versions for third party libraries, but it would certainly be less onerous if we could just ask developers to check the report themselves to see whether these are false positives and/or if there is some workaround that they need to do in cases where version upgrade is not an option. 2) The tool reports 2 types of security issues : public CVEs, and private "SONATYPE" issues. We're permitted to share the CVE numbers with a link to the NIST database describing the issue, but not the SONATYPE issues. The CVE issues usually are quite detailed and indicate clearly in which version the issue is resolved. The SONATYPE issues usually do not clearly specify where the issue is resolved and simply just point to the project's JIRA or Github page, which often doesn't clearly state the release when the fix was done. This makes it extremely difficult for us to provide guidance to developers on what exactly they need to do. I'm afraid that I don't know of an alternative tool to suggest, but I think it would be good for a small subteam to do some research to see if we can find an alternative. I'd be happy to be part of such a team. Dan -- Dan Timoney SDN-CP Development ONAP Project Technical Lead : CCSDK and SDNC Please go to D2 ECOMP Release Planning Wiki <https://wiki.web.att.com/display/DERP/D2+ECOMP+Release+Planning+Home> for D2 ECOMP Project In-take, 2016 Release Planning, Change Management, and find key Release Planning Contact Information. On 10/10/18, 10:09 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of OBRIEN, FRANK MICHAEL" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: Catherine, The situation on the ground is more fluid - we may get someone to fix a CLM issue for a couple hours - then they get assigned to other work. All of us are security experts as some point. A developer may take the initiative. Some workarounds Move the read/write part of the wiki where any contributor can edit what is being worked on. We can follow the rest of the security issues identified keeping us from violating our license. Bottom line is that running this commercial software does not mix well with open source development - I recommend we use something less restrictive. /michael -----Original Message----- From: Lefevre, Catherine via RT <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2018 7:04 AM To: Michael O'Brien <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Prudence Au <[email protected]> Subject: [ONAP Helpdesk #61994] [linuxfoundation.org #61994] RE: [onap-tsc] Allow non-PTLs to view/edit the CLM security wiki pages #clm #security Good morning Michael, Manoop, As previously discussed, we are not authorized to copy/paste the complete CLM report to the ONAP wiki. What you can or can’t do - has been previously documented here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_TSC-2B2018-2D09-2D13-3Fpreview-3D_41420751_41422209_ONAP-2520CLM-2520License-2520Version3.pdf&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=qLcfee4a2vOwYSub0bljcQ&m=GJRZDyPt7OxvhPZZf346V-fCqeLbVoz5lyyl-c5xKOs&s=0iV59QhFsRFJd7VjKcLxXjaniEgvIaibDMGR2TkGXhg&e= Nevertheless if you have identified your security expert(s) then I believe we might be able to swap them with 1-2 of your committers. Feel free to reach Gildas to explore this possibility with the Linux Foundation. Best regards Catherine From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of TALASILA, MANOOP Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 6:22 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; OBRIEN, FRANK MICHAEL <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: AU, PRUDENCE <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Allow non-PTLs to view/edit the CLM security wiki pages #clm #security ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. +1 The Portal team also in similar situation. The two security experts in our team are not PTL or committers, so they cannot access the CLM reports leading to delay in analyzing the impact and action on the identified vulneribilities. Please see, if you can relax the access or at least to provide access to requested team members (in our case we need access to these IDs – “[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>” and “[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>”). Manoop From: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Michael O'Brien <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 at 11:48 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Michael O'Brien <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Prudence Au <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Allow non-PTLs to view/edit the CLM security wiki pages #clm #security Hi, I was wondering if we can get the security rules relaxed – currently I would need to copy/paste wiki content for other members of the team doing the CLM work. Thank you /michael From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Michael O'Brien Sent: Friday, October 5, 2018 10:14 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: Prudence Au <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [onap-discuss] Allow non-PTLs to view/edit the CLM security wiki pages #clm #security Team, Hi, I have a request on behalf of my team and likely others. The CLM security pages are locked down too tightly – I would like other members of the team – in particular Prudence Au (my co-PTL along with Luke Parker) to be able to view and edit pages in the wiki space https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_SV_Security-2BVulnerabilities-2BHome&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=qLcfee4a2vOwYSub0bljcQ&m=GJRZDyPt7OxvhPZZf346V-fCqeLbVoz5lyyl-c5xKOs&s=yRRjlz66kNTVZFUxMTQxwp-jrxkDOYw-vYb8xVNMnrw&e=<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_SV_Security-2BVulnerabilities-2BHome&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=WrNqy1qTY6qs8trIiLe-U2OvGp0SXnE4nO3a-LJ-q_w&m=iUq2e1fcZ0ZWUCIQM8Kkn3CfYoukoHtjTFsSOQU0pLg&s=ep9iQknKUgFi9kibTREZn9VuMmQ4Jqr49fOkC1sMQHk&e=> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D43385152&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=qLcfee4a2vOwYSub0bljcQ&m=GJRZDyPt7OxvhPZZf346V-fCqeLbVoz5lyyl-c5xKOs&s=KBxsZWXlHK19rOnsZ9SZ2XNAlnCD-11Ir8mqoR7eUjw&e=<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D43385152&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=WrNqy1qTY6qs8trIiLe-U2OvGp0SXnE4nO3a-LJ-q_w&m=iUq2e1fcZ0ZWUCIQM8Kkn3CfYoukoHtjTFsSOQU0pLg&s=VRSjVGDc4SFvxR_Pd22P5pkl-MDJ7q0njmdxbh59lJ4&e=> The issue that we did not forsee – distribution of CLM work among the team. Also when a PTL is out for a 1 day vacation – the delegate PTL does not have access to the site. If the SV space is locked down – then the bottleneck is the PTL – in my case Prudence is a go-getter and would like to fix the remaining vulnerabilities – in our case we inherited several from another project we have a dependency – they already marked that vulnerability as a red-herring and have a pom override – but without myself acting as the wiki conduit – this work is slowed down with some re-inventing the wheel occurring. Can we make the site read/only at least for any of the following - Committers of a project - Ideally any committer of a project can see the pages of the other project – so one fix can be distributed among several Thank you /michael “Amdocs’ email platform is based on a third-party, worldwide, cloud-based system. Any emails sent to Amdocs will be processed and stored using such system and are accessible by third party providers of such system on a limited basis. Your sending of emails to Amdocs evidences your consent to the use of such system and such processing, storing and access”. “Amdocs’ email platform is based on a third-party, worldwide, cloud-based system. Any emails sent to Amdocs will be processed and stored using such system and are accessible by third party providers of such system on a limited basis. Your sending of emails to Amdocs evidences your consent to the use of such system and such processing, storing and access”. “Amdocs’ email platform is based on a third-party, worldwide, cloud-based system. Any emails sent to Amdocs will be processed and stored using such system and are accessible by third party providers of such system on a limited basis. Your sending of emails to Amdocs evidences your consent to the use of such system and such processing, storing and access”. “Amdocs’ email platform is based on a third-party, worldwide, cloud-based system. Any emails sent to Amdocs will be processed and stored using such system and are accessible by third party providers of such system on a limited basis. Your sending of emails to Amdocs evidences your consent to the use of such system and such processing, storing and access”. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3862): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3862 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27157280/21656 Mute #clm: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=clm&subid=2743226 Mute #security: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=security&subid=2743226 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
