Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.security > #6177 > unrolled thread

Debian Security Tracker - `no-dsa` Clarification

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.security

Contents

  Debian Security Tracker - `no-dsa` Clarification Hadas Bloom <hadas.bloom@snyk.io> - 2022-11-21 11:40 +0100
    Re: Debian Security Tracker - `no-dsa` Clarification Sylvain Beucler <beuc@beuc.net> - 2022-11-21 15:00 +0100

#6177 — Debian Security Tracker - `no-dsa` Clarification

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hello!

My name is Hadas, I'm in the Snyk Security Group. I've been in contact with
you a while back regarding the `no-dsa` field and its different tags.

I just want to further confirm if our understanding of the usage of the
various terms (`no-dsa`, `ignored`, `postponed`, "Minor issue") is correct:

1. From this
<https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Development#:~:text=%22no%2Ddsa%22%20is,the%20victim%27s%20infrastructure.>
documentation
it seems that "Minor issue" should not be used for drawing conclusions on
the severity of the vulnerability, but from this
<https://security-team.debian.org/security_tracker.html#issues-not-warranting-a-security-advisory:~:text=Sometimes%20an%20issue%20might%20not%20warrant%20an%20(immediate)%20security%20advisory%2C%20for%20example%20if%20its%20severity%20is%20minor.%20When%20that%27s%20the%20case%2C%20they%20are%20marked%20with%20a%20distribution%20tag%2C%20the%20%3Cno%2Ddsa%3E%20state%20and%20an%20explanation.>
documentation
it does seem like the severity might mean "minor" in these cases. Could you
please clarify that?

2. In our previous conversation there was a suggestion only to use the
`ignored` and `postponed` tags to understand the priority of the
vulnerability.
I do see that there are certain vulnerabilities, for example CVE-2022-45198
<https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2022-45198> in Buster,
that are only marked with "Minor issue" in the `no-dsa` field, and don't
have either of the `ignored` or `postponed` tags. Could you please help us
understand what we should do in such cases? What does the "Minor issue"
suggest here?


Thank you for the help,
Hadas

Hadas Bloom
Senior Security Analyst




 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#6178

Hi,

You may want to read this thread:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2021/05/msg00010.html
https://lists.debian.org/debian-security/2021/05/msg00012.html

I'd suggest you also explain your context, you seem to use the Debian 
tracker to trigger some action on your part, while the triage is meant 
to guide the Debian Security / LTS Teams' actions only, and is not 
particularly fine-grained.

Cheers!
Sylvain Beucler
Debian LTS Team

On 21/11/2022 11:01, Hadas Bloom wrote:
> My name is Hadas, I'm in the Snyk Security Group. I've been in contact 
> with you a while back regarding the `no-dsa` field and its different tags.
> 
> I just want to further confirm if our understanding of the usage of the 
> various terms (`no-dsa`, `ignored`, `postponed`, "Minor issue") is correct:
> 
> 1. From this 
> <https://wiki.debian.org/LTS/Development#:~:text=%22no%2Ddsa%22%20is,the%20victim%27s%20infrastructure.> documentation it seems that "Minor issue" should not be used for drawing conclusions on the severity of the vulnerability, but from this <https://security-team.debian.org/security_tracker.html#issues-not-warranting-a-security-advisory:~:text=Sometimes%20an%20issue%20might%20not%20warrant%20an%20(immediate)%20security%20advisory%2C%20for%20example%20if%20its%20severity%20is%20minor.%20When%20that%27s%20the%20case%2C%20they%20are%20marked%20with%20a%20distribution%20tag%2C%20the%20%3Cno%2Ddsa%3E%20state%20and%20an%20explanation.> documentation it does seem like the severity might mean "minor" in these cases. Could you please clarify that?
> 
> 2. In our previous conversation there was a suggestion only to use the 
> `ignored` and `postponed` tags to understand the priority of the 
> vulnerability.
> I do see that there are certain vulnerabilities, for example 
> CVE-2022-45198 
> <https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2022-45198> in Buster, 
> that are only marked with "Minor issue" in the `no-dsa` field, and don't 
> have either of the `ignored` or `postponed` tags. Could you please help 
> us understand what we should do in such cases? What does the "Minor 
> issue" suggest here?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.security

csiph-web