From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id CPqmM7ecUWBDdQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:07:51 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id gAJnL7ecUWCjQQAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 06:07:51 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8117A8B6B for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:07:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:44914 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMPLS-0006zG-A2 for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 02:07:50 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60384) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMPLF-0006zA-CG for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 02:07:37 -0400 Received: from mail.zaclys.net ([178.33.93.72]:44593) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMPLC-0005L0-RO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 02:07:36 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.44] (82-64-145-38.subs.proxad.net [82.64.145.38]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.zaclys.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 12H67WYg042949 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:07:32 +0100 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.zaclys.net 12H67WYg042949 Authentication-Results: mail.zaclys.net; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=lle-bout@zaclys.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zaclys.net; s=default; t=1615961252; bh=o0KhfAjxPinNIiaje8JdQd7CD+x2CNRgdZm3FlJ9w7w=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=aCKBDtlG5BFe74NTbfcaDTBC3ULWya92ovKvNjWsF3fmrdpiQPf2az5Z0UuG5/OSM H4GG1pkqVAcK780ukI6fzxCjg30/FE/ilmJ8YPTlbgJHNDdPcA9TpWtbZza/jJ7ZW5 lagSg44BcXgHyn1WwoEUfNKDW0TK3c2HtovyLeFM= Message-ID: <9f737d23e85e11ae4810373b043dd9c78eb0b5ae.camel@zaclys.net> Subject: Re: [opinion] CVE-patching is not sufficient for package security patching From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?L=E9o?= Le Bouter To: Mark H Weaver , guix-devel@gnu.org Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:07:31 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87v99qit39.fsf@netris.org> References: <9b9a43a584e2dc70488482fce5931b46abd0e006.camel@zaclys.net> <87v99qit39.fsf@netris.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-+MCM/QLEKma99ig6k9pa" User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.33.93.72; envelope-from=lle-bout@zaclys.net; helo=mail.zaclys.net X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1615961271; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=o0KhfAjxPinNIiaje8JdQd7CD+x2CNRgdZm3FlJ9w7w=; b=D62jVggpS/1FLdQXszfr2hY9rvy3FgDNAnDi4XI3/v4EC5I6Uy8nt6g4mzkIbzgkYMZy+H MvGs15Upt+RAs//E0Q8Cl6OlbEbV4pxUkPepN6NkfwZVHWZdqDkxVhScLAUSPhaX6xxC2f vtyituryGdDXOrRJb/zhxDu1yXDm2vr9ldU8RWAqtJpflWPrct78jom+kBnTgJ3ntrueUo zuN/J0pOS8cd12ghsLndnbGEBupilWMKsNPFkUOHWzhFR6DyTgRcM8wcKfwNYoyjg+Ck0A CeFon7DXRETIoJZBy0iCl1Lw1iw4gb539clNJ74C952XUydZJC7ABZ5GB5Qxcw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1615961271; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=feETNKiEoaTLdomSYitObKsByeDxc3BCnf/8vGrBxL/Qh/eyXosLIKLiCn7eVgHnIHKWlz 5aKsM4UqT0N0NTUyRfOf/g1Ncvwzw6ZuCQdyGejdQG0X+mwT8Xg6YtbX3gOauG+G0V8ViD 7s2is/s/+3dJTgp3q6nR8M19PnBAquF2txrf75vIRQXR8/DuAVP0FqPwEcVPx+OeKbXN1j aIul5B/zty0NxXWwVaVaGAqd2SM1eZrabXB3JFhQozJ1BiFdSvgvZHhZkijX/3724/BzWH VLBS5fYRpCM9G9RcnhX4WQaq3liUpHxzkQy9ZJN8MsUV8DVNc+fsrfVz8jjuFA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=zaclys.net header.s=default header.b=aCKBDtlG; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=zaclys.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -5.20 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=zaclys.net header.s=default header.b=aCKBDtlG; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=zaclys.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 8117A8B6B X-Spam-Score: -5.20 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: B5gQlZApFWN0 --=-+MCM/QLEKma99ig6k9pa Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2021-03-16 at 19:19 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > That said, I strongly disagree that we should "never backport patches > ourselves in most cases". The only way to do that, while addressing > security flaws, would be to promptly update even our lowest-level > libraries in response to CVEs, of which there is a steady stream. Fortunately I think that lots of these core package upstreams also have good CVE-issuance practices. For the Glib care in particular, I think they are good, I consider acceptable to backport patches, everyone is doing it, upstream is cooperative and works towards that same goal. To everyone else in general, I understand we have to ship a working system, and I want that too, that's why I said we should "strive" to, but it doesnt mean we should break things, of course. By that I mean that we shouldnt leave packages unmaintained without updates for too long even without CVEs or other security notices issued. At some point, if a package is of no use, no users show up and it's painful to update, we should also consider removing the package or archiving it in a third party channel we could create like "guix-archive", "guix-ugly" or "guix-love-me-please". L=C3=A9o --=-+MCM/QLEKma99ig6k9pa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEFIvLi9gL+xax3g6RRaix6GvNEKYFAmBRnKMACgkQRaix6GvN EKbgbA//ZntlBg4G5AS3vkYFAHI7kO2AoJhWmJzILuj211JQWpQnuw8fmQbrBaMV 2ILJNcFe47GisvkW27o0eYLmjfWLEVJJW3MVDAO4nqFFjGvYW8gta+xQwa3Gw9Oj klNBoCSu70zT4hN7xAe56WWhyNFKcmbmv4tozMR3bDYWGGXVyk17TOye21JYTul8 kR7/lj0V1jcc8wpUARCA66gLUP4CNcBh3wKNg6XlaYmQKRT3P3AsllStv3l83y1+ Lm1nfD9otXElIk5JepzVhXREjXhrILk/2JN4ofKd0X7QZeVYBBJA81t6dT9fRC6H GmSIBZjkb8VRC/Bw+1b15NFSTFDg5a4Bvc4FrlbnYZ8PjuSB8SWeeXxVuQD6pv1f qIP8+oJpyl4KiLcbaHLe0XNn4Ot6HKeqfvMcIn8jXnJoYxnalC6R1wcE8wCqogQp UBS5vmT9XKUmq2clQk3CjCtNqdSGWFOtY5I3mrSwg41KctG603vFvTAtKEgeZPov krU7yuA8JHF/+ZhgWj2BU3/tISR/Hm45NpxbKu2qXplEguy1a+kUkag//ohPD9hj WT3U7e/6fmsb+a2N59TWAMom+oN1faCionoeSFHBPrsDesW6Cig2KsvnULARgBgM DHYi+mY7lp7IGsrhw7ohYAfIweB/5BNfsORBkcuoTneAhj5amsU= =hg3d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-+MCM/QLEKma99ig6k9pa--