I also suggest copying the https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-security
list. Philip On 12/15/2015 11:03 AM, Mariano Lopez wrote: > There is an initiative to track vulnerable software being built (see > bugs 8119 and 7515). The idea is to have a testing tool that would check > the recipe versions against CVEs. In order to accomplish such task there > is need to reliable mark the patches from upstream that solve CVEs. > > There have been two options to mark the patches that solve CVEs: > > 1. Have "CVE" and the CVE number as the patch filename. > Pros: > Doesn't require a new tag. > Cons: > It is not flexible to add more information, for example two CVEs in > the same patch > > 2. Add a new tag in the patch that have the CVE information. > Pros: > It is flexible and can add more information. > Cons: > Require a change in the patch metadata. > > What I would recommend is to add a new tag in the patch, it must contain > the CVE ID. With this it would be possible to look for the CVE > information easily in the testing tool or in NIST, MITRE, or another web > page. For example, this would be part of the patch for CVE-2013-6435, > currently in OE-Core: > > -- snip -- > > Upstream-Status: Backport > CVE: CVE-2013-6435 > > Reference: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=CVE-2013-6435 > > -- snip -- > > The expected output of this discussion is a standard format for CVE > patches that most, if not all, of community members agree on. > > Please let me know your comments. > > Cheers, > > Mariano Lopez -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
