> On 18 Aug 2020, at 16:02, Henk Birkholz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just to be really sure: invoke implies executables and not code fragments, > yes? If you mean executables that would be the SAM scope of SWID then, I > think.
At this level I was thinking of both. So for instance, a loadable object such as a driver, or the supporting software that the driver might then invoke at user level (or visa versa). > > Why do you think that this has not been explored? I was under the impression > that this is currently being covered in the SBOM WGs out there. If it has, I am not aware, and that may be my own ignorance. I do know that they fully understand dependencies and some of those relationships can be quite rich between the systems (SWF gets down to a source file/function), and whether the software is present. But whether it’s invoked via a fn() or execv() and the like? That I haven’t seen. Eliot
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
