>-----Original Message-----
>From: Marko, Peter <[email protected]>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 12:04 PM
>To: Dhairya Nagodra -X (dnagodra - E-INFO CHIPS INC at Cisco)
><[email protected]>; [email protected]
>Cc: xe-linux-external(mailer list) <[email protected]>
>Subject: RE: [OE-core] [PATCH] cve-check-map: Move 'upstream-wontfix' to
>"Unpatched" status
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email protected] <openembedded-
>[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dhairya Nagodra via
>lists.openembedded.org
>Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 6:45
>To: [email protected]
>Cc: [email protected]; Dhairya Nagodra <[email protected]>
>Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH] cve-check-map: Move 'upstream-wontfix' to
>"Unpatched" status
>
>> - The 'upstream-wontfix' is to be used when the CVE is accepted by the
>>   upstream, but they are not planning to fix it.
>> - If the version used in Yocto is vulnerable, it should not have
>>   "Ignored" status. The package is still exploitable by the CVE.
>> - Also, when the status is exported out of the SDK, it would be
>>   incorrect to put it under Ignored catgory.
>
>The purpose of this entry is to remove meaningless CVEs from reports so that
>users don't spend countless hours over and over again on analyzing "open"
>CVEs if they were already closed upstream.
>If you look at comments of entries using this category (7 in oe-core scarthgap)
>these CVEs are more or less irrelevant.
>
>So this patch is from my point of view step in the wrong direction.
>If you really need to show these due to your CVE handling process, you can
>easily override this variable assignment in your own layer.
>


I tried this in my layer, created a .conf and included in my distro.conf file.
The issue is, it gets overwritten by cve-check-map.conf (as it is included 
later).

Would it be okay to make assignments soft in the cve-check-map.conf file?
This would be similar to CVE_PRODUCT and CVE_VERSION.
If everyone agrees, I can share the patch for it.
Is there a better way to do this?

Best Regards,
Dhairya


>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dhairya Nagodra <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  meta/conf/cve-check-map.conf | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/meta/conf/cve-check-map.conf
>> b/meta/conf/cve-check-map.conf index b9df41a6f3..7ff53f5601 100644
>> --- a/meta/conf/cve-check-map.conf
>> +++ b/meta/conf/cve-check-map.conf
>> @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@ CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[unpatched] = "Unpatched"
>>  CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[vulnerable-investigating] = "Unpatched"
>>  # use when CVE fix is not compatible to the current version and cannot be
>backported.
>>  CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[cannot-backport] = "Unpatched"
>> +# use when upstream acknowledged the vulnerability but does not plan
>> +to fix it CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[upstream-wontfix] = "Unpatched"
>>
>>  # used for migration from old concept, do not use for new
>> vulnerabilities  CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[ignored] = "Ignored"
>> @@ -26,5 +28,3 @@ CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[disputed] = "Ignored"
>>  CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[not-applicable-config] = "Ignored"
>>  # use when vulnerability affects other platform (e.g. Windows or
>> Debian)  CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[not-applicable-platform] = "Ignored"
>> -# use when upstream acknowledged the vulnerability but does not plan
>> to fix it -CVE_CHECK_STATUSMAP[upstream-wontfix] = "Ignored"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#203063): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/203063
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/107518628/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to