From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 893276011A; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:22:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2016 07:22:44 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,539,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="856466144" Received: from mlopezva-mobl2.zpn.intel.com (HELO [10.219.16.32]) ([10.219.16.32]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2016 07:22:41 -0800 To: benjamin.esquivel@linux.intel.com, openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org, "Burton, Ross" , Sona Sarmadi References: <567039E1.5000205@linux.intel.com> <3230301C09DEF9499B442BBE162C5E48ABABDD6C@SESTOEX04.enea.se> <568AB923.6080605@linux.intel.com> <1451938621.11986.1.camel@linux.intel.com> From: Mariano Lopez Message-ID: <568FD44A.9020801@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 09:22:50 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1451938621.11986.1.camel@linux.intel.com> Cc: "openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org" Subject: Re: [oe] [RFC] Mark of upstream CVE patches X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:22:43 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/04/2016 02:17 PM, Benjamin Esquivel wrote: > On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 12:25 -0600, Mariano Lopez wrote: >> On 12/16/2015 03:21 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: >>> On 16 December 2015 at 09:03, Sona Sarmadi >> > wrote: >>> >>> We are supposed to have reference to the CVE identifier both in >>> the patch file/s >>> and the commit message(e.g. xxx- CVE-2013-6435.pacth) >>> according >>> to the guidelines >>> for "Patch name convention and commit message" in the Yocto >>> Wiki https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/Security. >>> >>> If a patch address multiple CVEs, perhaps we should name the >>> patch: >>> Fix-for-multiple-CVEs.patch and list all CVEs in the patch >>> file. >>> >>> Will this not solve the problem? Do you think there is still >>> need >>> for a new tag "CVE"? >>> >>> >>> I'd say a new tag is essential if we want to automate tooling, to >>> reduce the chance of false-positives from simply searching the >>> patch >>> for something that looks like a CVE reference. >>> >>> Ross >> The conclusion of this thread is to add the tag "CVE" to the metadata >> of >> submitted CVE patches. I will edit the wiki to show this requirement. > Please let us know when the wiki has the changes reflected :) You can find it here: http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#CVE_Patches > >> Mariano -- Mariano Lopez