Rose,

 

 

Thanks for keeping these topics in front of everyone. They need to be
discussed and well understood. 

 

Thanks,

 

Dick Brooks

  

Active Member of the CISA Critical Manufacturing Sector, 

Sector Coordinating Council - A Public-Private Partnership

 

Never trust software, always verify and report!
<https://reliableenergyanalytics.com/products>  T

http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com
<http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com/> 

Email: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> 

Tel: +1 978-696-1788

 

From: Rose Judge <[email protected]> 
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2023 12:36 PM
To: Zavras, Alexios <[email protected]>;
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [spdx-tech] Package Supplier clarification

 

Thanks Dick and Alexios. This is helpful!

 

From: Zavras, Alexios <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >
Date: Friday, January 27, 2023 at 1:40 AM
To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>  <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >, Rose Judge <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>  <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> >
Subject: RE: [spdx-tech] Package Supplier clarification

        
!! External Email 

I am very much in favor or Rose's use of the "distributor" as "supplier" (in
Dick's wording).

 

It all depends on what "package" we're talking about. Taking OpenSSL as an
example:

*       If we're talking about openssl-3.0.7.tar.gz downloaded from
openssl.org or their GitHub repo, the Package Supplier should be "OpenSSL"
*       If, on the other hand, we're talking about
openssl_3.0.7-1ubuntu1_amd64.deb that was installed via apt(1) from the
upstream repository, the Package Supplier should be "Ubuntu" (or Canonical).
After all, who knows whether they have been changes from the upstream
sources.

 

Therefore, for packages coming from a Linux distribution, for example, I
believe that Package Suppler should the distribution.

 

Similarly, when I do pip install somemodule this gets downloaded from PyPi.
I have no way of knowing whether it was uploaded there from the original
project (with presence in somemodule.org, for example) or someone else. The
only thing I can safely say was that it was "supplied" by "PyPi".

 

-- zvr 

 

From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of
Dick Brooks
Sent: Thursday, 26 January, 2023 21:51
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> 
Subject: Re: [spdx-tech] Package Supplier clarification

 

Rose,

 

IMO, the SPDX Package Supplier is the same as Supplier Name within the NTIA
minimum elements (attached)

 

Three roles are coming into view on the IETF SCITT initiative:

*       Supplier (original creator of the software product/component)
*       Authorized Signing Party (A party that is authorized to sign an
artifact)
*       Distributor  (app stores, package managers, GitHub)

 

A single entity may serve in all 3 roles, or each role may be served by
separate entities.

 

There's also another role, "Vendor" - this would be System Integrators that
are delivering software products as part of an all-inclusive solution for a
consumer.

 

The consumer role is always present.

 

This is all still very much under discussion within SCITT.

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Dick Brooks

  

Active Member of the CISA Critical Manufacturing Sector, 

Sector Coordinating Council - A Public-Private Partnership

 

Never trust software, always verify and report!
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freliablee
nergyanalytics.com%2Fproducts&data=05%7C01%7Crjudge%40vmware.com%7C1d6261007
0bd401d229c08db004a936d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C6381040
92542473729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJB
TiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=YvkisiClshW0sTFEcQZnnfDHWV%
2B02zYvaRewzWZ%2FkAw%3D&reserved=0>  T

http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reliab
leenergyanalytics.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Crjudge%40vmware.com%7C1d62610070bd40
1d229c08db004a936d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C638104092542
473729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6I
k1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HeUihDt6%2FlnZg%2BFVMx9ky6PPCKrv
2dMReDk9wsQFPeU%3D&reserved=0> 

Email: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> 

Tel: +1 978-696-1788

 

From: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > On Behalf Of
Rose Judge via lists.spdx.org
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2023 3:19 PM
To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 
Subject: [spdx-tech] Package Supplier clarification

 

Hello,

 

I was reading a thread about Package Supplier field clarification from late
last year and was hoping to get even further clarification as we add this
information to Tern's SPDX documents. Regarding Sebastian's reply here
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.spd
x.org%2Fg%2FSpdx-tech%2Fmessage%2F4815&data=05%7C01%7Crjudge%40vmware.com%7C
1d62610070bd401d229c08db004a936d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%
7C638104092542473729%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2l
uMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=28nOu4Yr0AO4lU2959
gK7Y9%2FlQeUsiZSUst75AhrdSA%3D&reserved=0>  which says Red Hat would be the
supplier of RHEL packages -- would we use the entity/owner of the package
manager as the package supplier? For example, packages installed via "apt
install" = "Organization: Ubuntu" package supplier? And packages installed
via pip would be "Organization: PyPI" for the supplier; packages installed
using apk = "Organization: Alpine" supplier, etc?

 

Thanks in advance,

Rose 



Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.
de%2F&data=05%7C01%7Crjudge%40vmware.com%7C1d62610070bd401d229c08db004a936d%
7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C638104092542473729%7CUnknown%7C
TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%
3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e1iBaPDFULl36jW%2Fx9LZmHAPs0laJ6%2FlUP3Wz%2FlsdBc%3
D&reserved=0> 
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva   
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928

 

        
!! External Email: This email originated from outside of the organization.
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender. 

 



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#4947): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4947
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/96551804/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to