On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 5:05 AM Mark J Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 2:58 AM David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jan 2, 2022 at 2:59 PM Sam Ruby <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Jan 2, 2022 at 1:36 PM Mark J Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm really happy to see some great discussion on our response and the
> > > work
> > > > on the wiki so far. I felt there were some repeated parts
> > >
> > > There is an advantage at times to repetition, but at the moment, I
> > > will suggest that an executive summary be added to the beginning.
> > >
> > > Shoot for three bullets (one sentence or so each), with a max of 5.
> > > And try to make it so that if they only read the summary, they have
> > > been exposed to the important points.
> > >
> > > The danger is that the decision maker hands this to somebody to
> > > summarize.  We want to be ones to provide the summary.
> > >
> > > I think we have the raw data.  I'd suggest that you are in the best
> > > position to pick out the 3-5 points to highlight.
> > >
> > >
> > Agreed - I like the repetition. Sam and Mark this is great!
> >
> > I've done a little marketing copyediting to celebrate our status, and
> > provide some awe-inspiring numbers, so that folks realize the importance of
> > talking with us. I know that's counterintuitive to most things at the ASF,
> > but the ASF isn't our audience.
> >
> > Joe: I've specifically copied you here to ask that you copyedit this too.
> >
>
> I've added a first attempt of an executive summary.

I've forwarded on a snapshot of that page to our contacts in response
to their request for reading materials.

> Mark

- Sam Ruby

>
> >
> > > > and it needed
> > > > help with reordering, so I've created a copy as a sub-page with those
> > > major
> > > > edits and additional information about the security team role.  This
> > is,
> > > I
> > > > believe, just a submission we're making in advance of a pre-meeting so
> > it
> > > > doesn't need to be totally word-perfect, and I think it's still a level
> > > too
> > > > detailed (I left a lot of the existing text in); perhaps it needs more
> > of
> > > > the "why is the ASF important, influential, and relevant" kind of
> > > elevator
> > > > pitch.
> > >
> > > I added back in the link to www.apache.org.  I think that should
> > > suffice.  It does a better job than we can do, and doesn't distract
> > > from the content.
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=199530004
> > > >
> > > > Regards, Mark
> > >
> > > - Sam Ruby
> > >
> > > > On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 8:25 PM Sam Ruby <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > First read: this is awesome
> > > > >
> > > > > Second read: nope, not particularly controversial, and even the areas
> > > > > that are potentially controversial are adequately marked as such
> > > > >
> > > > > Third read: this concept may not match the intended audience.  I had
> > > > > to look up SDLC, but I'm certainly familiar with the concept of a
> > > > > Software Development Lifecycle, but the person we send this to may
> > not
> > > > > be - their area of intelligence may be elsewhere.  Actually, strike
> > > > > that - is undoubtedly elsewhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, whether this content is a gold mine or gobbledygook is in the eye
> > > > > of the reader.  And, all things considered, I'm entirely OK with
> > that.
> > > > > As long as we don't overwhelm them, we can try multiple approaches.
> > > > >
> > > > > I took a stab at concatenating the input to date, and the results are
> > > > > here:
> > > > >
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/COMDEV/White+House+Software+Security+Meeting%2C+January+13%2C+2022
> > > > >
> > > > > I adjusted the formatting, fixes a few typos, and reworded a few
> > first
> > > > > person references.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm actually very pleased with the results.  In theory, the ASF links
> > > > > at the top are all that one would need.  In practice, I expect that
> > > > > they will be skimmed and the reader will then proceed to the bullet
> > > > > points and background reading which tends to be more focused on the
> > > > > problem at hand.  With that background, the links are re-introduced,
> > > > > this time with relevant content surfaced to guide further reading.
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> > I don't think our intended audience is going to read our footnotes (the
> > links). If we get them to read a solid page of text before our meeting, I'd
> > consider that a huge accomplishment.
> >
> >
> > > > > In any case, the content is now on a wiki - hopefully that will
> > enable
> > > > > greater participation.  My only request is that anything beyond
> > > > > wordsmithing and formatting be accompanied by a post to this mailing
> > > > > list so that people tracking this content can follow along.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Sam Ruby
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jan 1, 2022 at 1:39 PM Phil Steitz <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 1/1/22 9:53 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > > > > > > Phil, I'm pleased to see that the links you curated are almost
> > > exactly
> > > > > > > the ones I picked: https://s.apache.org/3vkpr.
> > > > > > Yep.  I was happy to notice that too :)
> > > > > > >   And I'll add a link
> > > > > > > that we both missed: https://apache.org/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm not of the opinion that we should be creating new content for
> > > > > > > background material, nor do we have adequate time to do so.  But
> > I
> > > do
> > > > > > > take to heart the suggestion that these links should not be
> > buried,
> > > > > > > but rather put front and center.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you think about adding the following
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The best place to get started to know what the ASF is is here:
> > > > > > > https://apache.org/. That page is full of statistics, videos,
> > and
> > > > > > > links.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The following links in particular are important background to
> > this
> > > > > discussion:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   * https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
> > > > > > >   * https://www.apache.org/dev/
> > > > > > >   * https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
> > > > > > >   * https://apache.org/security/
> > > > > > >   * https://apache.org/theapacheway/index.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What still is missing is the concept of a "supply chain".
> > Perhaps
> > > > > > > something along the lines of the following, which applies to
> > log4j
> > > but
> > > > > > > also applies to much of what the ASF produces:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > * Software developed at the ASF is made available at no cost and
> > > > > > > without warranty
> > > > > > > * Commercial products may include this software without entering
> > > into
> > > > > > > any form of contract with the ASF, or even notifying us
> > > > > > > * End users may purchase these products but have little interest
> > or
> > > > > > > ability to apply fixes
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You are probably right, Sam, that we don't have time to develop and
> > > > > > agree on "new content" for this.  That is why I stopped short of
> > > > > > volunteering.  But this AM against my better judgement, I did some
> > > > > > hacking.  The idea is a bunch of little tl;drs decorated with
> > links.
> > > > > > The key supply chain concepts are in the how development works and
> > > how
> > > > > > the software is incorporated bits.  I think there are really three
> > > main
> > > > > > suppy-chain related ideas that people need to get:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 0) While I guess we may not all agree at this point that it works,
> > > our
> > > > > > biggest defense against vulnerabilities getting introduced is
> > > eyeballs,
> > > > > > which our open development process supports.  Any interested human
> > > (or
> > > > > > bot) can be a QC inspector in our direct contribution part of the
> > > supply
> > > > > > chain.  We have always welcomed this, especially when reports come
> > > with
> > > > > > patches.
> > > > > > 1) There is a natural nesting that happens as software dependencies
> > > > > > propagate through applications.  Addressing vulnerabilities in base
> > > > > > level components (e.g. log4j) has a cascading impact.  Unless and
> > > until
> > > > > > all downstream systems have effectively automated build, test and
> > > > > > deployment systems, this creates systemic risk which has nothing to
> > > do
> > > > > > with OSS per se.  In his original post, markt called this out,
> > along
> > > with
> > > > > > 2) End of life is an industry standard concept that we apply at the
> > > > > > ASF.  End of life means no more patches.  End of life software
> > > running
> > > > > > in critical systems is another systemic risk.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > OK, here is what I hacked in the wee hours last night.  Could be
> > > best to
> > > > > > just use as notes or ignore if others don't agree with the content.
> > > > > > --------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * Foundation organization and governance structure
> > > > > > (https://www.apache.org/foundation/governance/)
> > > > > >   The ASF is an operating US 501(c)3  organization that supports
> > > several
> > > > > > hundred open source projects.  The operating part of the ASF is
> > > managed
> > > > > > by the President, supported by the Treasurer, Vice Presidents,
> > > > > > committees and third parties.  The ASF board provides oversight for
> > > > > > operating functions as well as ASF project communities.  The Legal
> > > > > > Affairs, Security and Treasurer departments report directly to the
> > > > > > board, which means, for example that the Security team acts with
> > the
> > > > > > authority of the board.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How oversight works (
> > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html)
> > > > > > ASF projects are run by Project Management Committees (PMCs).  PMC
> > > > > > members review and cast binding votes on releases, nominate and
> > vote
> > > on
> > > > > > new PMC members and collectively manage community, security,
> > > trademarks
> > > > > > or other problems.  The PMCs act on behalf of the ASF when they cut
> > > > > > releases.  The PMC plays a key role in technical project oversight,
> > > but
> > > > > > not the only role.  The full project community contributes by
> > working
> > > > > > (creating and reviewing) patches and contributing to discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All ASF community members, including PMC members, officers and the
> > > > > > board, participate in our communities as individuals, not as
> > > > > > representatives of companies or other organizations.  Some
> > community
> > > > > > members are paid by their employers to contribute to ASF projects
> > > but in
> > > > > > their ASF work they are expected to act in the best interest of the
> > > > > > community, exercising their own best judgement.  Impact on project
> > > > > > decisions is based on publicly earned merit which accrues to
> > > > > > individuals, based only on their contributions at the ASF.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How development works (https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html)
> > > > > > ASF projects don’t all work the same and the ASF does not prescribe
> > > any
> > > > > > kind of SDLC for our projects.  What we do require is that
> > everything
> > > > > > happens in the open:
> > > > > >      All bug reports are visible to all interested parties (with
> > > > > > exception of reported security vulnerabilities, which are kept
> > > private
> > > > > > until patched)
> > > > > >      All commits to project source code are tracked and visible to
> > > all
> > > > > > interested parties
> > > > > >      All project-related discussion that can be public is public
> > > > > > ASF projects differ in how they do things, but most have documented
> > > > > > process for working bug reports, introducing new features and
> > > planning
> > > > > > and executing releases. As new features are developed and bugs are
> > > > > > addressed, code changes are made that will go into releases.
> > > Typically,
> > > > > > proposed changes are submitted as “pull requests” (PRs) that
> > > explicitly
> > > > > > describe how the source will change if they are applied.  The
> > > original
> > > > > > source, the PR and any changes that result from applying it are all
> > > > > > publicly visible.  Any interested party can comment on proposed
> > > changes
> > > > > > and it frequently happens that performance, security or other
> > issues
> > > are
> > > > > > discovered in the open development process that creates and
> > modifies
> > > ASF
> > > > > > software.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How releases are versioned, validated and distributed
> > > > > > (https://www.apache.org/dev/#releases)
> > > > > > ASF software is distributed and meant to be consumed in the form of
> > > > > > versioned releases.  ASF PMCs have various ways of packaging
> > software
> > > > > > for distribution, but the core asset being released is always
> > source
> > > > > > code. Releases must be voted on by PMCs, who are responsible for
> > > > > > validating release candidates (RCs).  Most PMCs also make RCs
> > > available
> > > > > > to the public prior to or during release votes. Library or
> > > > > > infrastructure projects sometimes make backward-incompatible
> > changes
> > > as
> > > > > > they develop new versions of their software.  Sometimes, a
> > > > > > backward-compatible version of the software is added and maintained
> > > in
> > > > > > parallel, but it often happens that the actively supported version
> > is
> > > > > > not backward compatible with an older version.   When library or
> > > > > > infrastructure components make backward incompatible changes,
> > > downstream
> > > > > > users may have to make code changes to upgrade their applications.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How ASF code is incorporated in other software
> > > > > > ASF software is used in running systems in basically 3 ways:
> > > > > >   1.  A distributed system includes a running ASF product (e.g.
> > > Apache
> > > > > > web server)
> > > > > >   2.  ASF software is integrated with other software to build
> > > > > applications
> > > > > > When applications created in 2. are themselves used to create other
> > > > > > applications, nesting happens, causing the impact of a
> > vulnerability
> > > or
> > > > > > incompatible change at the lowest level to have a cascading impact.
> > > > > > When a new release is made available by an ASF project, downstream
> > > users
> > > > > > need to minimally make configuration changes and test their
> > > systems.  In
> > > > > > case 2. above they typically have to rebuild and redeploy their
> > > > > > applications.  In nested situations, this often has to happen
> > > > > sequentially.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How security reports are handled (
> > https://www.apache.org/security/
> > > )
> > > > > > The ASF encourages responsible disclosure of security
> > vulnerabilities
> > > > > > discovered in software managed by ASF projects.  The ASF security
> > > team
> > > > > > sets policy, maintains security contacts for PMCs and provides
> > > support
> > > > > > for projects responding to security issues. Reporters are
> > encouraged
> > > to
> > > > > > use the designated security contacts to report vulnerabilities
> > > > > > privately.  PMCs are required to respond to security reports
> > > promptly,
> > > > > > working with reporters to investigate and if necessary develop
> > > > > > patches.   The ASF Security team may assist the PMC in publishing a
> > > CVE
> > > > > > once the vulnerability has been patched and a release containing
> > the
> > > > > > patch has been made available.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * How end of support works
> > > > > > Like all software products, ASF code lines go through a lifecycle
> > the
> > > > > > terminates in end of support.  Typically, ASF PMCs communicate end
> > of
> > > > > > support dates for products or code lines with ample time (one year
> > > plus)
> > > > > > for users to plan upgrades or find alternatives.  Once communicated
> > > end
> > > > > > of life dates arrive, the PMC is no longer expected or required to
> > > > > > accept or apply patches to the end of life versions. This includes
> > > > > > security patches against identified vulnerabilities. Therefore in
> > > some
> > > > > > cases, when users who are depending on no longer supported versions
> > > of
> > > > > > ASF software,  a version upgrade will be required to obtain a fix
> > of
> > > an
> > > > > > identified vulnerability and that may require code changes to
> > > integrate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Phil
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Sam Ruby
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 3:10 PM Phil Steitz <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> Thanks, Sam.  I think the bullets below are good for the meat,
> > but
> > > > > based
> > > > > > >> on David's summary of the CISA conversation and various public
> > > posts,
> > > > > I
> > > > > > >> think there is some important background / educational material
> > > that
> > > > > we
> > > > > > >> need to communicate.  The points that Mark makes about the lack
> > of
> > > > > > >> "upgrade agility" across the supply chain are not obvious to
> > > people
> > > > > who
> > > > > > >> don't do this every day, which is pretty much 100% of the
> > audience
> > > > > > >> here.  If what we are collectively trying to solve is a supply
> > > chain
> > > > > > >> issue, we really need a better level set on how exactly the
> > supply
> > > > > chain
> > > > > > >> works.  We have a fairly nicely encapsulated piece of it at the
> > > ASF
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> explaining how that piece works is good background and good
> > > context
> > > > > for
> > > > > > >> how "help" can meaningfully applied in our communities.  It also
> > > sets
> > > > > us
> > > > > > >> up to ensure that the consequences of any external actions,
> > regs,
> > > etc.
> > > > > > >> on our part of the supply chain are understood.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So I would suggest that the meat below follows a brief
> > > backgrounder on
> > > > > > >> ASF structure, governance, release and security processes and
> > > > > policies,
> > > > > > >> emphasizing the points where we connect to different software
> > > supply
> > > > > > >> chains and how we accept and manage security issues.  Probably a
> > > lot
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >> that can come from existing web pages, e.g [0-3].  It is
> > probably
> > > > > also a
> > > > > > >> good idea to ask Sally to help review any docs we provide that
> > > are not
> > > > > > >> just links to the web site.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> The key thing to keep reminding ourselves is that a) the WH and
> > > other
> > > > > US
> > > > > > >> gov ppl want to act and b) their understanding of root causes
> > and
> > > > > > >> practical solutions likely contains large gaps that can only be
> > > > > > >> addressed by getting a fuller understanding of how OSS is made,
> > > > > > >> distributed, consumed and maintained.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Phil
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> [0] https://www.apache.org/security/
> > > > > > >> [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
> > > > > > >> [2] https://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html
> > > > > > >> [3] https://www.apache.org/dev/
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On 12/31/21 12:06 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > > > > > >>> In addition to the in-person meeting next month, we are invited
> > > to
> > > > > > >>> send read-ahead material and there will be a brief phone call.
> > > Given
> > > > > > >>> that the call will only last 30 minutes, I presume that call
> > > will be
> > > > > > >>> consumed by introductions, logistics, and perhaps questions
> > > about the
> > > > > > >>> read-ahead material.  That call will be on Wednesday, so I
> > would
> > > like
> > > > > > >>> to send any read-ahead material that we might have late morning
> > > EST
> > > > > on
> > > > > > >>> Monday.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> My thoughts are to lead with a summary/bulletized version of
> > > what has
> > > > > > >>> been discussed recently on this list, followed by actual
> > > pointers to
> > > > > > >>> the original emails.  Here's a first draft...
> > > additions/corrections
> > > > > > >>> welcome, both to the bullet points and new posts (preferably to
> > > this
> > > > > > >>> list) that should be added.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Key bullet points
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>   * This will require collective action
> > > > > > >>>       o There are things we can do, both individually and
> > > together,
> > > > > to
> > > > > > >>>         reduce the number of vulnerabilities.
> > > > > > >>>       o There are things, such as SBOMs, that can help identify
> > > what
> > > > > is
> > > > > > >>>         affected once a vulnerability is found.
> > > > > > >>>       o Much of this is moot if patches are never applied.
> > > > > > >>>   * Volunteers/community/participation
> > > > > > >>>       o Out contributors tend to be seasoned software
> > > professionals
> > > > > > >>>         whose employers include ASF releases in their
> > commercial
> > > > > products.
> > > > > > >>>       o Our communities are healthy, open, and transparent.
> > > > > > >>>       o Companies an government agencies that want to help
> > don't
> > > need
> > > > > > >>>         money or formal contracts to do so.  Join our mailing
> > > lists,
> > > > > > >>>         review our code, contribute fixes.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Background reading:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>   * EO - Mark Cox - https://s.apache.org/3nctr
> > > > > > >>>   * SBOM - David Nalley - https://s.apache.org/hccur
> > > > > > >>>   * Applying updates - Mark Thomas -
> > https://s.apache.org/5jqab
> > > > > > >>>   * Collective action - Phil Steitz -
> > https://s.apache.org/ljzn0
> > > > > > >>>   * Volunteers - Sam Ruby - https://s.apache.org/3vkpr
> > > > > > >>>   * Contributors/maintenance - Dominik Psenner -
> > > > > > >>> https://s.apache.org/3lrk1
> > > > > > >>>   * CISA - David Nalley - https://s.apache.org/1gr1c
> > > > > > >>>   * Get Involved -
> > > > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/getinvolved.html
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> - Sam Ruby
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> > >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to