14:02:06 #startmeeting Security Team Meeting - Agenda: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security_Team_meetings 14:02:06 Meeting started Thu Apr 30 14:02:06 2015 UTC. The chair is Sparks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:02:07 its security meeting? 14:02:09 #meetingname Fedora Security Team 14:02:09 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_security_team' 14:02:13 #topic Roll Call 14:02:15 * Sparks 14:02:19 * d-caf 14:02:44 .fas stbnruiz001 14:02:44 stbnruiz: stbnruiz001 'Esteban Ruiz Diaz Baez' 14:02:48 .me 14:03:05 .hellomynameis pjp 14:03:06 pjp: pjp 'None' 14:03:32 .hellomynameis stbnruiz 14:03:33 stbnruiz: Sorry, but you don't exist 14:04:21 Ouch, harsh zodbot 14:05:05 Okay, lets get started. 14:05:16 * Sparks wonders if jsmith will be around this morning 14:05:23 #info Participants are reminded to make liberal use of #info #link #help in order to make the minutes "more better" 14:05:32 * jsmith is here, but on another call for ${DAYJOB} as well 14:05:34 #topic Follow up on last week's tasks 14:05:55 jsmith: Okay, can you comment on rubygem-activesupport? 14:06:53 Just waiting for feedback 14:07:05 So far, it seems like nobody has tested the scratch build 14:07:09 jsmith: How long are you going to wait? :) 14:07:17 Not much longer 14:07:20 :) 14:07:21 I think I'll just push the update 14:07:28 ... as in today 14:07:30 jsmith: the Fedora maintainer was going to fix the EPEL branches too, no? You had a word with him? 14:07:48 pjp: I haven't seen anything from mmorsi 14:08:08 jsmith: I see, maybe it'll help to talk to him, 14:08:47 At least it'll avoid duplication of efforts 14:09:16 #action jsmith to patch rubygem-activesupport as provenpackager (BZ 905374) 14:09:59 We'll revisit this next week. Maybe you can try to reach out to mmorsi again? Otherwise, I'd just push the fix. 14:11:32 pjp: Whatever happened with the non-responsive maintainer regarding that package? I'm guessing you made contact? 14:12:04 Sparks: Yes, the EPEL maintainer said he no longer uses the EPEL package and thus has no time to maintain it, 14:12:21 pjp: Will he be orphaning the package? 14:12:33 Sparks: Upon contacting mmorsi about it, he said he'll work on fixing the EPEL branches of the package 14:12:45 mmorsi is the Fedora branch maintainer 14:13:00 Okay, so is he going to continue to maintain the package after this fix? 14:13:13 Sparks: The bug is still open, once mmorsi updates the EPEL branch, I'll close it 14:13:19 Sparks: Yes, 14:13:29 Okay 14:13:45 #topic 90-Day Challenge 14:14:04 #link https://ethercalc.org/90-day-challenge 14:14:13 #info 90-Day Challenge has a goal to close all 2014 and prior Important CVEs in Fedora 14:14:23 #info As of 2015-04-29, of the 38 target bugs 9 have been closed, 4 are On_QA, 25 are Open 14:14:30 #info Two cases have had non-responsive maintainer process started. 14:14:48 Cool! :) 14:14:57 So we're up to about 25% of the cases being closed or close to being closed. 14:15:17 And we've burned through around 33% of our time. :) 14:15:26 Still, this is very good! 14:15:59 Interestingly enough, I've seen that most of these cases just needed a little nudge to get them rolling. 14:16:19 That's true for lot of cases 14:16:19 Looks like one of my tickets the current maintaner doesn't have time make a patch 14:16:30 It seems that they just forget about pushing updates 14:16:38 pjp: +1 14:16:57 I wonder if they understand the definition of "maintaining". 14:17:02 :) 14:17:12 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1132022 14:17:22 * pjp clicks 14:17:30 I started two non-responsive maintainer processes yesterday. 14:18:20 d-caf: Yeah, I saw that. That's not really a good response. 14:18:30 Sparks: yeah, I was not impressed 14:18:37 d-caf: If they don't have time to deal with the package then they need to orphan it. 14:18:48 d-caf: Give someone else a chance to pick it up and run with it. 14:19:09 Sparks: Agreed that was what I was going to propose 14:19:43 +1 14:19:56 I have another ticket that will need to be non-reponseive process as well #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1142546 14:20:47 Yep 14:21:41 Sparks: This one is Michael Stahnke again, I guess it'll need to be orphaned too, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=917234 14:21:58 Sparks: I'll pursue it further 14:22:27 looks like fedora branch is already orphaned 14:23:17 Okay 14:23:34 Let's move on... 14:23:40 #topic Outstanding BZ Tickets 14:23:47 #info Thursday's numbers: Critical 1, Important 37 (-5), Moderate 341 (-3), Low 156 (-5), Total 535, Trend -13 14:23:52 #info Current tickets owned: 110 (~21%) 14:23:56 #info Tickets closed: 303 (+14) 14:24:30 I a bit worried by the %age of cases being owned. It appears that we're closing cases but not jumping on the new ones. I wonder if that's because of the challenge. 14:25:14 I'm trying to pick up a few new ones as well, specially important 14:25:36 +1 14:26:01 It seems, though, that we have just a small handful of folks doing work. I wonder what we can do to get more people involved. 14:27:48 I haven't jumped on any new cases in a while... but I'll try to do that 14:28:01 Sparks: email list + blogs to invite more people, also we might need to help them to start 14:28:04 Especially since I"ll be on the road the next two weeks 14:28:13 pjp: +1 14:28:27 pjp: We can all do some blogging to get folks interested. 14:28:39 Could we host a test day kind of exercise on some day? 14:28:44 Sparks: Yes, 14:28:54 Sparks: Or even a FAD! 14:28:56 * pjp makes a note to write one over weekend 14:29:26 jsmith: I think we're pretty well distributed to do a FAD. 14:29:30 jsmith: Yes, FAD is a good idea too, though it'll be more local 14:29:41 Sparks: Flock workshop? 14:29:50 s/well distributed/well too distributed 14:30:07 jsmith: Are you going to Flock? I wasn't planning on it myself. 14:30:51 Sparks: Probably going, yes 14:31:00 * pjp has submitted a talk too, 14:31:27 We could have a FST meet-up at Flock ;) 14:31:58 WORKSFORME 14:32:39 Where is Flock? 14:32:43 jsmith: I guess you submitted a talk at FUDCon APAC, no? 14:32:55 d-caf: Rochester, NY 14:33:10 pjp: Yes, and it was accepted -- but I haven't yet gotten permisison from my boss to buy my plane ticket :-( 14:33:20 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flock 14:33:41 jsmith: Oh, :( 14:33:53 pjp: Still have about a 50% chance of coming :-) 14:34:13 jsmith: That's cool! Look forward to see ya again :) 14:35:31 Are there any objections to going the fedora maintainers recommendation of removing this package from EPEL: #https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824089 14:35:40 jsmith: Can you send something to the list? 14:35:52 Sparks: Sure... will do. 14:35:55 It's also likely an abandoned package since I've got no response from the actual maintainer 14:37:49 d-caf: right, it's been retired from -devel and F21 14:38:23 But removing from EPEL depends on if there are any users or dependent packages for it 14:38:59 pjp: Yeah, it's going to be a little more work to see if it get's cleared up, but patching it's probalby even more work 14:39:17 * pjp nods 14:39:18 specially since there is not an active maintainer 14:39:30 Yep, 14:40:08 If there are no objects I'm going to start looking into what it's going to take to remove it, maybe I'll get lucky :-/ 14:40:21 d-caf: Sure, 14:40:35 objects/objections... 14:47:45 Hello..!?! 14:47:47 Sparks: around? 14:47:51 ? 14:48:26 d-caf: I was wondering why the sudden silence 14:48:35 We are nearing closing time, 14:48:37 I was about to comment 14:48:46 as well 14:48:49 :) 14:49:01 Sparks: ? jsmith: ? 14:49:31 Sorry, got pulled into work meeting 14:49:49 I'm fine with dropping it 14:49:52 If there is not much on pending bugs, I had filed couple of tickets against the fedora-design & -badge teams 14:49:57 #link https://fedorahosted.org/design-team/ticket/367 14:50:04 #link https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-badges/ticket/373 14:50:09 Yeah, I took a look at them 14:50:23 The designer need our comments and feedback 14:50:40 Please provide your due comments on those tickets, it is important as they are working for us 14:51:09 I would comment, but I haven't figured out the appropriate login to use 14:51:11 The least we could do is tell them if we like/dislike what they are creating, 14:51:23 d-caf: FAS login works 14:51:46 pjp: didn't work last night, but maybe I just caught it at a bad moment 14:52:20 d-caf: Oh, I've been using it with no issues at all, 14:52:37 pjp: Yeah, just failed for me now as well 14:52:46 probably something messed up with my account 14:52:54 some perm some where 14:53:05 d-caf: You have permission in your FAS account to share credentials for validation? 14:53:23 d-caf: I think openid validation requires that, 14:53:34 Sorry, I'm on a phone call 14:53:37 d-caf: if you login to FAS system, there is checkbox to tick 14:53:41 Sparks: okay 14:53:43 Yeah, i'll need to check, haven't gotten to taht yet 14:53:43 #chair pjp d-caf 14:53:43 Current chairs: Sparks d-caf pjp 14:54:52 #topic Open floor discussion/questions/comments 14:55:38 I've spent the week dealing with the fallout of the recent WordPress security issues 14:55:55 jsmith: Ah yeah 14:56:00 4.2.1 was *not* a great patch for the vulnerabilities in 4.2, so a 4.2.2 release should be coming soon 14:56:16 jsmith: Any word on a 4.1.3 patch? 14:56:29 or they forcing all to go the 4.2.x branch? 14:56:36 Also, the drupal7-views vulnerability has been patched by asrob, and there's a new package in updates-testing 14:56:42 #chair jsmith 14:56:42 Current chairs: Sparks d-caf jsmith pjp 14:56:48 Whew, sorry about that folks. 14:56:54 d-caf: I think they're backporting as far back as 3.7 14:56:57 Sparks: np, 14:57:04 d-caf: At least, if it's not too hard for them to do so 14:58:02 3 minutes to conclude, 14:58:45 * pjp sent a mail ping to Michael Stahnke 14:58:51 I had nothing further, I'll get my FAS fixed and try to comment on the designs 14:59:08 d-caf: Cool, thanks much! :) 14:59:53 We are reaching closing time, let's continue further discussion on the list, 15:00:34 End meeting - 1 15:00:46 End meeting - 2 15:01:07 End meeting - 3 15:01:09 #endmeeting