From: Marta Rybczynska <rybczynska@gmail.com>
To: OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>,
openembedded-architecture
<openembedded-architecture@lists.openembedded.org>,
yocto-security@lists.yoctoproject.org
Cc: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ross Burton <ross.burton@arm.com>,
Steve Sakoman <steve@sakoman.com>,
Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@kernel.crashing.org>,
Joshua Watt <JPEWhacker@gmail.com>
Subject: VEX work status
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 19:29:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAApg2=Q4APgxqsEYKSswn4duCDbU_MYX9YR0FZGoOt6G_scC6w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1943 bytes --]
Hello all,
We're close to the point to post RFC patches of the VEX work. As a
reminder, we're working on storing SBOM/CVE information for later use and
be able to re-run the cve-check in the future.
To do that, we split out the nvd fetcher and cve-check from the YP builds
to a separate tool. This tool can be used manually or integrated into the
YP build system. To be able to generate that information, we needed to
extract more data that was done previously, including package versions,
CPE, any manual attestations from CVE_STATUS and related variables,
detailed reasons for attestations and so on.
Following other discussions and taking into account the NVD situation,
we're integrating the "raw" CVE check using MITRE data (with possible
overrides, some other repositories like the CISA one could be added with
minimal effort). There will be two backends for the CVE check: the NVD
backend and the "cve.org" backend.
In the process, we also gain VEX support. The format resembles OpenVEX.
However, the format does not support all the attestation types that we need
so we add some, to avoid losing data. The file could be easily
post-processed to remove the additions, but subsequent checks might be less
accurate.
Good news is, that the change surface is quite limited, so backports to LTS
branches should be quite easy. It will be also possible to keep both the
old and new code (there's an additional 'vex' class).
If you have any questions, let me know. I expect the first RFC by the end
of the month, if there are no last minute difficulties.
Kind regards,
Marta
PS. There will be a more detailed status on the raw CVE check tomorrow. You
can have a look atthe first POC showing how to do a CVE check using MITRE
data directly (not using the data from the standalone tool in this version)
in https://github.com/mrybczyn/cvelistv5-tools-poc/ and the corresponding
overrides repo https://github.com/mrybczyn/cvelistV5-overrides
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3084 bytes --]
reply other threads:[~2024-05-15 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAApg2=Q4APgxqsEYKSswn4duCDbU_MYX9YR0FZGoOt6G_scC6w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=rybczynska@gmail.com \
--cc=JPEWhacker@gmail.com \
--cc=mark.hatle@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=openembedded-architecture@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
--cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=ross.burton@arm.com \
--cc=steve@sakoman.com \
--cc=yocto-security@lists.yoctoproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).