From: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: "Pierrick Bouvier" <pierrick.bouvier@oss.qualcomm.com>,
"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"Mauro Matteo Cascella" <mcascell@redhat.com>,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Thomas Huth" <thuth@redhat.com>,
"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
Subject: [qemu-web RFC 0/3] switch to GitLab confidential issues for security disclosure
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2026 17:50:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260604165048.457860-1-berrange@redhat.com> (raw)
I previously raised the idea of using GitLab issues for security
disclosures:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2026-05/msg04582.html
This patch proposal formalizes that into a concrete proposal:
* qemu-security is entirely discontinued
* "confidential" GitLab issues are to be used
* The priority is to have a low overhead process that is
as close to normal bug & development workflow as
possible.
* No embargoes will be accepted, beyond the time needed
for a maintainer to develop a patch, unless extenuating
scenarios apply. A vendor's/user's desire to delay to
suit their arbitrary software upgrade schedule is NOT
an extenuating scenario.
* All confidential issues will be expected to be made
public, either when the patch is proposed to qemu-devel,
or sooner if a issue is low severity and a patch is not
a priority for the manitainer
* Eliminate dependency on any single maintainer/person to
the greatest extent practical
Some open questions
* I describe using "cve::required" as a gitlab label to
track issues that need CVEs allocating. I'm unclear what
the best way is to actually do the allocation. This is
where it is hardest to eliminate the single person
bottleneck / burden.
Traditionally I would email Red Hat product security via
Mauro (CC'd) but that's still a single point of failure.
I'm personally not willing to sign up for QEMU to be a
CNA, because they have unreasonable expectations for
volunteer projects. I'm not going to give them my phone
number nor agree to any SLAs for response to query.
From a selfish QEMU upstream maintainer POV, I would say
that CVEs are largely devoid of value. The people who
care most about them are the downstream vendors who
ship old QEMU versions and track bugs for backporting.
If we want to pull a security fix into our stable release
branches we can do that easily without a CVE.
Thus one nuclear option is to say "not our problem" and
no longer assign CVEs at all. Instead assign a unique ID
of QEMU's invention "QEMU-SEC-nnnnn", and let downstream
vendors take the pain of allocating and mapping QEMU's
identifiers to CVE identifiers.
* We have >100 disclosed issues to qemu-security
that were classed as non-virtualization bugs which
I asked the reporter to file gitlab issues for.
Almost no one followed up to do that. I don't want
these bugs to go into a black-hole as they are all
basically valid, but I also don't fancy bulk filing
100's of issues from my own account.
There are also more non-triaged issues some of which
are valid security bugs which ought to be tracked
rather than sucked into a black-hole. Again that
implies more bulk filing of bugs :-(
* Moving away from a small dedicated group of people
handling security reports, to a distributed
responsbility has a notable risk - every maintainer
may consider it "someone else's problem" and ignore
security disclosures. Some poor sucker then gets to
run triage across an ever increasing set of issues
and try to encourage maintainers into responding.
Based on our experience with normal bug triage work,
I'd say it is a near certainty that this will happen
to some extent.
I don't have any answer here other than even this
bad outcome will probably be less bad that the status
quo with qemu-security email disclosure. Personally
I can/will not continue with the email workflow any
more.
IMHO this mostly points towards the downstream vendors
needing to invest more in QEMU if they want to have a
guaranteed security SLA upstream.
Daniel P. Berrangé (3):
contribute: reformat/restructure bug report guidance
contribute: add automate tool disclosure to bug reporting
contribute: switch security process to gitlab confidential issues
contribute/report-a-bug.md | 63 +++++---
contribute/security-process.md | 280 ++++++++++++++-------------------
2 files changed, 155 insertions(+), 188 deletions(-)
--
2.54.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-06-04 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-04 16:50 Daniel P. Berrangé [this message]
2026-06-04 16:50 ` [qemu-web RFC 1/3] contribute: reformat/restructure bug report guidance Daniel P. Berrangé
2026-06-08 13:13 ` Peter Maydell
2026-06-04 16:50 ` [qemu-web RFC 2/3] contribute: add automate tool disclosure to bug reporting Daniel P. Berrangé
2026-06-08 13:16 ` Peter Maydell
2026-06-10 10:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-04 16:50 ` [qemu-web RFC 3/3] contribute: switch security process to gitlab confidential issues Daniel P. Berrangé
2026-06-08 13:39 ` Peter Maydell
2026-06-10 10:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-10 8:14 ` Thomas Huth
2026-06-10 10:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-10 11:02 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2026-06-10 11:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-10 11:10 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2026-06-10 11:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-08 16:10 ` [qemu-web RFC 0/3] switch to GitLab confidential issues for security disclosure Mauro Matteo Cascella
2026-06-10 10:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-10 11:07 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
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=20260604165048.457860-1-berrange@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=mcascell@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pierrick.bouvier@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.