From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists1p.gnu.org (lists1p.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E998DCD4F3D for ; Wed, 20 May 2026 17:39:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wPktJ-0004iO-Rn; Wed, 20 May 2026 13:39:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists1p.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wPktD-0004he-Qv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2026 13:39:28 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1wPktB-0007hi-Vd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2026 13:39:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1779298765; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=QoCKweNTTpAZW3KRhzQwo2wkASN/ITg4FvU4SIswXDA=; b=Qsp0aajsySwDEhJoZBzpKESzOmwh9EE839O0jZYuhYf2yMdAQsKbS/FsButnpmzNvViJ8l FT93u1zthdzB7U4DzJAmd9QVXsRaOwsHn/Oz3S/e0MdS6FFsOmVGtPFGVgnHAxFSZoQOVZ NTSjr7awK3aO5GpRxp1njghy8+DWpOI= Received: from mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-640-fVnK1eKHPnOrtiVBXheVfw-1; Wed, 20 May 2026 13:39:21 -0400 X-MC-Unique: fVnK1eKHPnOrtiVBXheVfw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: fVnK1eKHPnOrtiVBXheVfw_1779298760 Received: from mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7578619560BB; Wed, 20 May 2026 17:39:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.44.49.211]) by mx-prod-int-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC3C71800357; Wed, 20 May 2026 17:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 18:39:14 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Pierrick Bouvier Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Mauro Matteo Cascella , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= , Thomas Huth Subject: Re: RFC: GitLab issues for security disclosures Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.3.1 (2026-03-20) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.93 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: 8 X-Spam_score: 0.8 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (0.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.445, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 12:33:16PM -0500, Pierrick Bouvier wrote: > On 5/20/2026 10:09 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 10:01:14AM -0500, Pierrick Bouvier wrote: > >> Hi Daniel, > >> > >> On 5/19/2026 9:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > >>> The qemu-security mailing list was created several years back now and > >>> traditionally saw 1-2 disclosures a month at worst. This was manageable. > >>> > >>> Since approx March 1st, the new normal is to see as many as 20 disclosures > >>> in one single day, more than 200 in total now. This is unsustainable. > >>> I was thinking we needed more people on qemu-security to triage, but IMHO > >>> this won't really fix the problem. > >>> > >> > >> Considering the increase in number of issues, would that be possible to > >> make stricter rules about what is expected? > >> > >> For instance, asking for a working exploit and optionally a VM image + > >> instructions to reproduce it. I am not expert on the topic, but what I > >> see is that if we have this, all duplicates would be eliminated at once. > > > > With the new crop of AI assisted disclosures there is absolutely no > > lack of data provided. > > > > Most come with reproducible exploits, detailed descriptions and analysis, > > and more - everything you could conceivably need to triage the disclosure. > > Reading and interpreting this takes significant mental effort and there's > > too much data to quickly/easily eliminate dupes. > > > > Maybe we need to "standardize" this part then. > Or do something like asking a (GitLab) CI pipeline to be written to > expose the issue. If we can just run this with a specific qemu > remote/branch, it becomes trivial to rerun it when fixes are pushed. > > It definitely does not solve the original scaling issue, but maybe can > help to absorb it, and spend time where it's useful: writing and > upstreaming a fix, and check it "broke" the exploit. > > >>> This needs an issue tracker to cope with & email is not an issue tracker. > >>> We faked an issue tracker with a shared spreadsheet to prevent us drowning > >>> these past few months, but this is still not sustainable & probably won't > >>> ever be. > >>> > >> > >> Overall, you're right. > >> However, changing the tool won't solve the number of issues sent, and > >> for that, something additional is needed. > > > > I don't expect there to be any change in submission rate. The proposal > > is based on the expectation that the submission rate will continue at > > a high level for a long time. Primarily the goal is to reduce the > > tracking and triage work overhead and to eliminate/reduce single person > > bottlenecks in the process > > > >> I wonder also what is the percentage of duplicates there is from what > >> you observed in the last 2 months. Any rough idea of the number? > > > > Definitely at least 10%, probably closer to 15%. > > > > Ok, interesting number, thanks. I was expecting much more, but I'm > biased having heard Linus this morning talk about this for Linux kernel. I expect the dupes to increase over time as more people run the same analysis across QEMU, especially given that most of the bugs are not yet fixed. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com ~~ https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :| |: https://libvirt.org ~~ https://entangle-photo.org :| |: https://pixelfed.art/berrange ~~ https://fstop138.berrange.com :|