17:00:28 #startmeeting Security 17:00:29 Meeting started Thu Oct 15 17:00:28 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is hyakuhei. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:33 The meeting name has been set to 'security' 17:00:36 o/ 17:00:37 o/ 17:00:39 o/ 17:00:50 Who would like to co-chair (in case I get called out) 17:00:50 o/ 17:00:59 i can hyakuhei 17:01:06 #chair elmiko 17:01:06 Current chairs: elmiko hyakuhei 17:01:12 o/ 17:01:28 o/ 17:01:34 Hey :) 17:01:44 I’ve got the standing agenda over here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-20151015-agenda 17:01:52 Please feel free to modify/add as required 17:02:37 o/ 17:02:40 man, our agenda is getting serious ;) 17:02:48 It’s scary right. 17:03:28 We didn’t get to cover some things last week because Killick and Ansible soaked up a lot of time 17:03:30 o/ 17:03:34 hey ccneill 17:03:39 afternoon, all 17:03:52 true 17:04:26 #topic Summit 17:04:43 Hello! 17:04:44 hi 17:04:49 #startvote Should we cancel next weeks meeting due to the summit? Yes, No, Maybe 17:04:50 Begin voting on: Should we cancel next weeks meeting due to the summit? Valid vote options are Yes, No, Maybe. 17:04:51 Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts. 17:04:56 #vote Yes 17:05:05 #vote Yes 17:05:06 #vote Yes 17:05:15 #vote Yes 17:05:15 #vote Yes 17:05:17 #vote Yes 17:05:23 lol 17:05:27 #vote yes 17:05:29 That was fun! 17:05:30 popular :P 17:05:33 #vote no 17:05:39 I'll already be in Tokyo next Thursday 17:05:42 nice redrobot ;P 17:05:45 Trust you redrobot ! 17:05:51 ccccccombo breaker! 17:05:53 nkinder: nice! I land on Monday :-s 17:05:55 lol 17:05:57 #endvote 17:05:58 Voted on "Should we cancel next weeks meeting due to the summit?" Results are 17:06:00 Yes (7): michaelxin, mvaldes, browne, tkelsey, hyakuhei, nkinder, elmiko 17:06:01 No (1): redrobot 17:06:05 ^ grrr 17:06:17 ok perfect, that really was fun! 17:06:22 lol 17:06:28 Next up #link https://mitakadesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/Security#.Vh_bWxNVhBc 17:06:32 I'll still be in TX and this is my lunchtime entertaiment :) 17:06:35 hyakuhei is easily amused :P 17:06:41 yarp 17:06:57 So We’ve got fishbowls assigned, one community one and one authZ 17:07:10 As per #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-mikata-scheduling 17:07:19 Any big issues or concerns? 17:07:37 (We cant change the title of the work sessions but if you look we’ve got one for syntribos and one for bandit 17:08:16 so, we have four sessions in total? 17:08:17 there's overlap with keystone sessions so I don't think I'll be able to make them all 17:08:49 i like that the fishbowl session no one signed up to attend is making the cut =) 17:09:00 record it for me 17:09:45 Well we had two suggested fishbowls 17:09:46 so.... 17:09:53 hehe 17:09:55 . 17:10:03 there. fixed. 17:10:17 Daviey: Good to see you buddy! 17:10:23 don't get me wrong, i'm totally cool with it, but that's mainly my selfish desire to continue talking about it 17:10:37 hyakuhei: lol +1, love the change 17:10:44 elmiko: +1 I think its a cool idea though I have my reservations about it 17:10:52 agreed 17:10:59 #topic Flyer 17:11:15 I think maybe it was michaelxin who suggested having a flyer for the Security project? 17:11:26 hyakuhei: Yes 17:11:29 I think that’s actually an awesome idea but I’ve not had time to come up with anything 17:11:31 +1, nice idea 17:11:39 I will find a graphic designer 17:11:47 michaelxin: +1 17:11:48 Thanks, I have no talent in that area 17:11:58 And come up something early next week 17:12:15 Alternatively we could just get a stack of security project business cards, Just with the links for the group and our main functions. 17:12:19 I like the flyer idea more 17:12:25 stickers 17:12:25 but it needs someone else to take it on 17:12:30 dg_: +1 17:12:31 Do you guys want this flyer to be specific to this summit? 17:12:46 Doesn’t have to be 17:12:51 I think we might as well make it generic so we can reuse it at meetups 17:12:54 i think generic would be nice 17:12:55 +1 17:12:58 +1 stickers 17:13:00 I like the idea of getting them out at the security sessions 17:13:07 We need stickers anyway 17:13:14 :D 17:13:19 is there an OSSG logo? 17:13:25 No, wanna do one? 17:13:30 hyakuhei: +9000 17:13:32 I do dabble in PHotoshop 17:13:34 (hyakuhei: Sorry, not ignoring you.. Distracted by a real life meeting) 17:13:38 haha 17:13:39 I can try to come up with something 17:13:45 ccneill i dont think its called OSSG anymore... 17:13:45 * hyakuhei hrmmph's 17:13:46 no promises though, it's not my day job ;) 17:13:53 I will ask the designer to come up with a logo too 17:13:56 OpenStack Security Project 17:14:02 OSSP? 17:14:03 Please do both, you guys are awesome 17:14:10 dg_: sssh. 17:14:13 So, we are not Openstack Security Group? 17:14:20 Not since we went big-tent 17:14:30 We’re the official OpenStack security project 17:14:33 OK, OSSP then. 17:14:37 Openstack Security Project / OSSP, got it 17:14:44 because each $big-tent-thing is a “project" 17:15:06 Not team or ninja horde - both were rejected by the TC when I tried. 17:15:10 Not sure whether we have time for stickers by next week 17:15:11 OpenStack Security Cabal 17:15:26 michaelxin: probably not but we’re making a start which is cool 17:15:26 ccneill: lol 17:15:27 haha 17:15:50 Top of list for next summit for me is publicity, getting a number of cross projects in etc 17:16:31 but for this one it’s getting the crypto ducks in a row and trying to get more involved with the contianer people 17:16:55 Just in time for our promotion in Austin. 17:17:18 ccneill: will talk about OSSP in Austin openstack meetup 17:17:25 Yeah I think that’ll be a good venue to really start pushing our influence, we’re continuing to gain momentum and pick up new members 17:17:30 and convincing project 17:17:33 (projects) 17:17:42 Like Syntribos, Bandit etc 17:18:19 I haven’t arranged a specific meetup for Security at the summit because the agenda is rammed already and we largely consist of dual homed developers like bknudson 17:18:42 However, if anyone can see a good time to meet please feel free to suggest it 17:19:07 karaoke after midnight? 17:19:19 Why not! 17:19:21 hehe 17:19:27 elmiko: +1 17:19:31 Anything else summit related ? 17:20:09 #topic OSSN 17:20:22 nkinder: Are you subscribed to the emargoed OSSN? 17:20:43 hyakuhei: I believe so (if it's the issue I'm thinking of) 17:21:01 Yeah there’s only one. It’s ready to be openly discussed / published now 17:21:07 [the notification window closed] 17:21:13 hyakuhei: this is the one tmcpeak worked on, right? 17:21:29 he and I wrote it up, yes 17:21:49 hyakuhei: so if it's ready to expose, then we should put it in an official review and we can fast-track it through 17:21:59 I’m fine with that 17:22:01 Sorry @all 17:22:25 hyakuhei: do you or tmcpeak want to create the review? 17:22:49 Sure I’ve just asked for the bug 1493448 to be opened up 17:22:57 Then I’ll do the review, add the fixes-bug etc 17:22:58 Ok, great. 17:23:21 So @all, there was a vulnerability in glance that we decided needed an OSSN rather than an OSSA 17:23:46 For the first time though we felt the issue was so severe that downstream stakeholders deserved to get advanced notice of the OSSN before it was more widely published 17:23:58 it’s nice for the VMT to show that much faith in the OSSN process 17:24:07 nkinder: what’s the general state of the other OSSN? 17:24:11 So for non-embargoed stuff, there's one glance one that I just pushed through. It should merge later today, then I'll publish it. 17:24:21 sweet! 17:24:27 There's a trusted compute one that just needs some minor updates that elmiko pointed out 17:24:34 very nice 17:24:37 I think michaelxin was working on that one 17:24:50 I will update it today. 17:25:01 michaelxin: thanks! 17:25:05 I’ll look to review it tomorrow am. Thanks michaelxin 17:25:28 I think we should retire this one - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136203/ 17:25:32 yea, i'll keep an eye out today 17:25:36 +1 17:25:41 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/220263/8/security-notes/OSSN-0059 17:26:02 Ok, I'll abandon it 17:26:12 heh, depreciating vs deprecating. good catch. 17:26:31 The way I spell there’s a 50/50 chance it’d auto-correct into either of those 17:26:38 Anything else OSSN? 17:27:01 So that's the review queue for OSSNs. I believe we have a few other new ones to be picked up 17:27:05 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/ossn/ 17:27:20 The backlog doesn't look too bad though 17:27:22 Yeah we cleared a lot of that out post mid-cycle 17:27:30 * ccneill bumps https://bugs.launchpad.net/ossn/+bug/1497031 17:27:30 Launchpad bug 1497031 in OpenStack Security Notes "Authenticated Denial of Service in Blacklists" [Undecided,New] 17:27:34 probably a few there we could jump onto 17:27:35 <_< 17:27:49 I'd be happy to write it up, just haven't done it before. I can work with michaelxin on it 17:28:09 Hehe, that’s a nice issue 17:28:25 yeah.. gotta <3 regexes 17:28:27 ccneill: feel free to ping in openstack-security too, we have plenty of experienced folks now =) 17:28:27 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Security_Note_Process 17:28:36 will do :) 17:28:37 yeah, quite a few of us can help 17:28:42 ccneill: +1 17:28:45 Best bet if you’re not sure is to get it up for review early 17:28:57 +1 17:29:14 Rather than slaving on something that might go in the wrong direction we can work on it more collaboratively but as you’re the reporter I’m sure this’ll go smoothly 17:29:48 I'll do my best haha 17:29:59 #topic Ansible Hardening 17:30:04 I feel like there's a doc somewhere describing the OSSN write-up process, but I can't find it in my bookmarks at the moment 17:30:16 ^ I linked it above 17:30:19 shweet 17:30:29 mhayden has been super busy #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/openstack-ansible-security,n,z 17:31:05 It’d be nice to show some support and review a few of those, maybe even add some. It seems like a valuable project 17:31:13 we are glad to help. 17:31:21 Greg already talked with Major. 17:31:36 i need to skill-up more on ansible... 17:31:40 He will help with code reviewing. 17:32:35 elmiko: review-wise it’s not to hard to read and understand what’s going on 17:32:45 excellent 17:32:59 #topic PR 17:33:11 tmcpeak couldn’t be here so I’ll raise this :) 17:33:13 #link https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/13GG47EdoQCBEGqMe7ji_UzfO9okMTLgbnK5_UpoaXYA/edit?usp=sharing 17:33:39 hyakuhei: i did take a look, just didn't want to add noise. i'll circle back around though. 17:34:20 that deck is looking nice 17:34:46 The deck is coming together well, it needs some dry runs and perhaps some tweaks but it’s pretty good as is. Thank you to everyone who contributed 17:35:29 hyakuhei: are there any gaps left? 17:36:15 Daviey: none of my bits :P 17:36:27 tmcpeak can do a runthrough with us during lunch at the summit 17:36:32 Bascially it needs _lots_ more speaking notes 17:37:04 at the moment there’s good slides but not much guidance for people who might not be very familiar with each of our main activities 17:37:14 Nathaniel isn’t around to talk about docs 17:37:18 tkelsey: bandit? 17:37:24 can do 17:37:25 #topic Bandit 17:37:38 so we pushed 0.14.0 and then 0.14.1 17:37:52 whoop! 17:37:58 nice 17:38:00 should be no fallout for people using it in the gate, anyone spots somthing. let me know 17:38:11 nice 17:38:12 so we could still use some more documentation for the plugins 17:38:17 lots of nice new features, checkout the info on PyPI 17:38:27 browne: yeah for sure 17:38:41 but we have somthing now at least 17:38:42 tkelsey: Sorry for being absent, but how is the gate checking looking? 17:39:03 Daviey: looking good, you can run the coverage script to see for yourself :) 17:39:13 tools/coverage.py i think 17:39:22 yeah, i saw that,.... nice! 17:40:04 I would also like feedback on this #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/235491/ 17:40:14 I just saw the weak curve plugin, very nice. 17:40:22 its the first baby steps to making a symbol table for deeper inspection in bandit 17:40:38 hyakuhei: thx, but i also forgot to doc it 17:40:47 hyakuhei: yes its nice to see new crypto tests going in 17:41:04 browne: yup, docs please :) 17:41:40 I dont think there is too much else bandit related, anyone got anything else? 17:41:40 we should also consider bumping g-r bandit version at some point 17:41:41 tkelsey: symbol stuff looks interesting 17:41:54 elmiko: thanks, its very experimental 17:41:54 I don’t think we have anything Anchor related 17:41:56 tkelsey: this looks very cool 17:41:57 elmiko tkelsey yes 17:42:04 I can see by the commit how stressy it was :P 17:42:18 haha :) 17:42:27 adfkjnasdf Experimental ajsdnfkafba symbols asjbkdfa.... 17:42:42 lol 17:42:42 :P that's how i normally type 17:42:52 Anywho, it has the potential to allow you to do some very clever things with Bandit, good work tkelsey 17:43:05 tkelsey: good job 17:43:20 So nothing much to say on Anchor this week. Maybe dg_ and redrobot could argue about Killick for a while ? 17:43:34 :) 17:44:03 lol 17:44:10 I think that’s everything we had on the agenda this week :D 17:44:17 Also, we had an agenda this week! 17:44:22 nice :) 17:44:32 #topic Any other business 17:44:33 good work 17:44:47 Anything to add before we close? 17:44:53 Remember, no meeting next week! 17:44:56 dg_ will you be attending the summit? I think it would be good to catch up 17:44:58 what's our plan for container project? 17:45:09 container security project 17:45:13 michaelxin: can you elaborate ? 17:45:17 redrobot unfortunately not, but rob can cover any PKI stuff 17:45:21 +! 17:45:31 That's one of the topics listed in mid-cycle. 17:45:42 But we did not have time then. 17:45:48 Oh right ok 17:46:00 So there’s so much container magic moving around at the moment 17:46:07 im interested in the container project as well 17:46:25 Magnum is trying to decide if it’s a COE facilitator or more of an updated Nova-Docker 17:46:35 Kolla is a thing I don’t really understand 17:46:40 plus a bunch of otheres 17:46:42 Synopsis: Containers make security more challenging both with introspection, internal networking, and at-scale tooling. OpenStack currently has no security documentation around containers, and no resources looking at the specs on Magnum, Kuryr, or Kolla. This will be a discussion around how the container release cycle (Docker has been as much as 3 months, and as little as 3 weeks) fits into larger efforts like Kubernetes 17:46:43 with OpenStack. 17:47:00 I don’t think there’s enough stability there to really throw effort in. 17:47:41 helping with container orchestration security seems more bang for the buck, imo 17:47:57 the containers themselves are still the wild-wild-west 17:48:00 In the openstack context, containers are normally layered ontop of compute which somewhat isolates them 17:48:04 from say, baremetal containers 17:48:13 which would need a whole heap of extra controls 17:48:25 ok 17:48:55 I’m interested in a roadmap item on this and it seems like a good crossproject/fishbowl for austin but I’m open to ideas around how we could move on this more quickly 17:49:06 +1 17:49:14 +1 17:49:46 One of my team member showed strong interest and wants to lead the efforts. 17:50:04 I will check with him 17:50:13 cool 17:50:36 excellent 17:50:45 Anything else for today ? 17:50:48 so.. I started working on some fuzzing utilities for functional tests (used in barbican & designate) before we started on Syntribos, and I'm trying to get them a home in tempest-lib. if anyone has some time to take a look, I'd appreciate it greatly. not a lot of interest so far it seems. this CR is basically a skeleton at this point, but I have a lot of fuzz strings to add in a follow-on CR. 17:50:49 you can also see them in the earlier patches. #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/216303/ 17:50:59 wow, that was even longer than I thought haha 17:51:20 I’ll take a look :) 17:51:30 ccneill: someone pointed this out to me last week, or so, i'll take another look. thanks! 17:51:31 ty :) 17:51:44 ccneill: will look 17:51:51 nice work ccneill 17:51:59 thanks, all 17:52:08 Ok, I think we’re done here! Thanks everyone! 17:52:12 #endmeeting