Idea: Have a Tagsecurity-preparednessor similar for the preventative upgrade issues so we can regularly remind the teams to upgrade their dependencies. Let's talk about this next week
Seems like a good idea, and can help increase visibility of these issues.
May also help the Security team streamline weekly meetings
Once we have the label in place and it's being used, we should update our filters/boards accordingly...
Exclude these by default
Add a quick filter?
etc.
5 min
Proxy for Dev-Setup
John + Team
John has been discussing this with Zak/Jason - doing this in stripes-cli. It sounds like they're coming around to this idea.
I've been in communication with David Crossley, Wayne Schneider, John Malconian and Peter Murray about the issue above. They apparently didn't have access to these embargoed issues (SysOps and Core Team). Peter shared this screenshot with me, which doesn't look right. I'd like to review this at one of our meetings and come up with a list of changes/improvements for Peter to make. A few ideas off the top of my head:
Add descriptions to each of the security groups, like we have for "FOLIO Security Group"
Maybe add a new security group and level for FOLIO devops
Review membership of each of these groups and remove users no longer on the project
Review the Security Level -> Group mappings. Some of these don't look quite right to me.
Do we need to backport these fixes to Q? If so, it will need to go into CSP6
It seems clear that we DON'T need this for Poppy, but probably do need it for Quesnelia
Today:
(Craig) will clarify if the fix in mod-data-export-spring needs to be backported (See SECURITY-189 / MODDEXPSP-270 (sp?)
-
Policy for deprecating and eventulaly removing unsupported code
Team
The idea is to draft a proposal policy for this and run it by the TC for approval...
"mod-foo has known security vulnerabilities which are high/critical and have not been addressed in N months. If these aren't addressed within N months the repository will be archived" Something like that...
Communication will be key here... Need to sort out the details.
TC has officially decided that FOLIO will support Go language for module development. The OST pages have not yet been updated.
Would need for Go language to be approved and mod-reporting needs to be approved by TC to be included in Sunflower release
Other modules that are used in production are higher priority to address
mod-graphql has 1 critical issue
Mike Taylor is the owner. Need to reach out to see if he can fix the issue. If he is not available, need to go through TC.
MODGQL-160
-
Getting issue details...STATUS
SECURITY-218
-
Getting issue details...STATUS
was discussed. Eureka team should provide details. Craig McNally will coordinate.
Topic Backlog
Time permitting
Advice for handling of sensitive banking information
Team
From slack conversation, I think I've gathered the following:
In this case (bank account and transit numbers), the information is highly sensitive.
Highly sensitive information should:
Be stored in it's own table
Accessed via a dedicated API
Protected by a dedicated permission
Encrypted in the database, not only on disk.
This could mean either:
Explicitly encrypting/decrypting in the application layer and storing the encrypted data in postgres
Let's review and discuss before providing this feedback to Raman.
Axel Dörrer also suggested that defining classes of sensitivity could help teams determine which techniques are applicable in various situations. I agree having some general guidelines on this would be helpful.
regular data
low sensitive - permission based on same API
high sensitive - permission based on dedicated API
It would probably help to provide concrete examples of data in each class. This can be a longer term effort, we don't need to sort out all the details today.
Next Steps:
Clearly define/formalize the various classes
Come up with concrete examples of each class
Build out guidance
Come up with concrete examples of how to protect each class of data.
Consider storing some classes of data outside of postgres altogether - e.g. in secret storage.
What would be the guidance we provide to teams for this so we don't end up with each team doing things differently?
SecretStore interface and existing implementations are currently only read-only. They would need to be extended to allow for creation/mgmt of this information.
Craig to start a conversation in slack about this.
Seeking a volunteer to generate a draft document for us to review at a later meeting.
Today:
Axel Dörrer to do a first draft as a base for further discussions
Status on pentesting works within Network traffic control group
