Hi Richard,

Thanks for the comments.

The last thing I want is to hinder and reduce the number of contributors. Thay 
why I wanted to have it optional and discuss it in the mailing list to see if 
people think is useful.

I fully agree that we need the buy in from the people involved to make it work.

Best regards,
Daniel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Purdie <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, 5 February 2026 10:05
> To: Daniel Turull <[email protected]>; security-
> [email protected]; openembedded-
> [email protected]
> Cc: David Partain <[email protected]>; Marta Rybczynska
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Proposal for coordination on work
> for CVE backports
> 
> Hi Daniel,
> 
> On Thu, 2026-02-05 at 08:23 +0000, Daniel Turull via lists.openembedded.org
> wrote:
> > I would like to propose a way of working on coordinating CVE backports
> > to reduce wasted effort.
> >
> > Problem:
> > Now with the CRA more are more companies will start sending backports
> > to the different LTS branches for oe-core and meta-openembedded. This
> > will make 2 or more people working on the same correction, resulting
> > on a waste of time for the persons that do not send the patch first.
> > This time could have been invested in fixing another CVE, which then
> > whole community will benefit.
> >
> > We discussed this in a small group in the OSS EU in Amsterdam last
> > August and Marta ask to create the a new mailing
> > listhttps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > lists.openembedded.org%2Fg%2Fsecurity-
> discussions&data=05%7C02%7Cdanie
> >
> l.turull%40ericsson.com%7C97f33fc2e3514562e21708de6495af4c%7C92e84ce
> bf
> >
> bfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C639058791196671985%7CUnknow
> n%7CTWFpb
> >
> GZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zM
> iIsIkF
> >
> OIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kw%2BCEsUXvV
> A8TgCsSN2
> > xerSgydONVrscAg8RPVFzfe0%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > So far, no one has been using the mailing list.
> 
> As far as I know, that list was created directly by the OE board and wasn't
> discussed with the OE or Yocto Project TSCs, just to see what happened.  The
> challenge with doing that is that nobody was really consulted and there
> wasn't much communication around it.
> 
> The OE TSC should really therefore defer to the OE board and ask it what it's
> plans are. The Yocto Project isn't involved.
> 
> > Proposal:
> > To use the mailing list when someone is starting to work on a backport
> > and announce it. This is completely optional but could help others to
> > prevent stating working on the same backport. If there is no activity,
> > let’s say within a week, anyone could take the lead. The person who
> > initiated can also indicate the status if he/she gets stuck and needs
> > help.
> >
> > The list can also be used to coordinate work, for example if a CVE is
> > complex and the person working on it gets stuck.
> >
> > Format:
> > Subject: Starting oe-core backport for CVE-XXXX-XXXXXX for component X
> > version Y
> >
> > Example:
> > Subject: Starting oe-core backport for CVE-2025-68276 for avahi 0.8
> >
> > Once we agree, I can write the documentation, so it is also
> > visiblehttps://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F
> > %2Fdocs.yoctoproject.org%2Fdev%2Fsecurity-
> manual%2Findex.html&data=05%
> >
> 7C02%7Cdaniel.turull%40ericsson.com%7C97f33fc2e3514562e21708de6495a
> f4c
> >
> %7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C63905879119669594
> 5%7CUnk
> >
> nown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwM
> CIsIlAiOiJ
> >
> XaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z3
> %2BAJ%2
> > BibFgqXL5imv9G%2Fve%2F9FX3vKkBXwon5mHlihmw%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > Do you think is a good idea? Any comments or suggestions of
> > improvements?
> 
> Sharing the proposal is a good start but I'd like to hear from Marta about why
> this was setup and why the TSCs weren't involved. I actually hate to ask that
> question as it does start to pull more process into this and I don't like how
> much work the existing process can cause me in particular. That said,
> changing the project's security processes without the involvement of the TSCs
> doesn't seem right to me. I end up being one of the people who tries to
> follow the rules and procedures we setup, I'd love to just bypass them myself!
> 
> Moving past the process issues and looking at the proposal itself, I think I'd
> observe that:
> 
> * we want to try and have as little overhead around fixing CVEs as we can.
> 
> * the more process we put around it, particularly if we start insisting on 
> it, the
> fewer contributions we might get
> 
> * how (and who) would handle someone who says they start things but
> never submit them?
> 
> * if someone mentions on the list they're working on it but someone else
> does it first, which one gets merged?
> 
> * some existing contributors struggle to get management by in for sharing the
> CVE fixes, this may make it harder to contribute for them
> 
> * some companies don't want to announce the fact they're aware of a
> security issue as for example that has implications under the CRA
> 
> * some companies also view what they have people working on, or how long
> it takes as commercially sensitive
> 
> We really need the buy in from the people writing and submitting these
> changes so I'd be interested to hear from them in particular. If they say 
> they'd
> find it useful *and* are willing to participate, then I think we could make
> something happen. If they can't/won't participate, I don't think this will 
> work.
> 
> I also have concerns about the naming of a "security-discussions"
> mailing list. I'm not 100% sure this use was the original intended use, I 
> think
> there were others intended. We probably need to hear from Marta and the
> OE board about any other plans there.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#2237): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2237
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/117650483/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to