17:00:43 #startmeeting OpenStack Security Group 17:00:44 Meeting started Thu Jan 29 17:00:43 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is hyakuhei. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:45 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:48 The meeting name has been set to 'openstack_security_group' 17:00:52 zomg bdpayne ! 17:01:00 lol 17:01:08 hi 17:01:12 bdpayne: btw, jursey is back in the chan 17:01:16 o/ 17:01:23 spamming the peeplez 17:01:30 lol (not laughing, arms up) 17:01:34 hey guys 17:01:42 o/ 17:01:44 o/ 17:01:49 o/ 17:01:54 I'll see what I can do with my amazing powers :-) 17:01:57 o/ 17:02:10 \o\ dancing it out 17:02:34 lol everyone is exitable today 17:02:41 /o/ 17:02:47 Must be anticipation of the meetup of awesomeness 17:02:49 ello 17:03:13 too much fun with ghost busting 17:03:23 lol yes 17:03:29 So agenda for today? 17:03:34 bandit 17:03:38 * Anchor 17:03:46 * Meetup 17:03:51 * Bugs 17:04:02 * GLIBC Spectres 17:04:22 Anything else ? 17:04:36 looks like a good start 17:04:56 Ok lets roll 17:04:59 #topic Bandit 17:05:12 ok - regretfully we have a PyPI collision on the Bandit name 17:05:26 Grrr. 17:05:33 https://pypi.python.org/pypi/bandit/0.0.1 17:05:34 boooo 17:05:34 BANdit? 17:05:34 I've asked the owner if he wants to give it up, but I'm not holding my breath 17:05:35 heh 17:05:36 clearly we shall call it bandit2 17:05:42 bandido? 17:05:51 redrobot: +1 lol 17:06:02 might be able to take it over 17:06:09 yeah, so a few options, slightly different name, totally different name, same name with something appended 17:06:21 wanted to see what the folks favor 17:06:29 particularly chair6 since it's his baby 17:06:39 tmcpeak: +1 17:06:52 +1 17:07:12 Bandicoot? 17:07:13 redrobot: +1 17:07:33 I'm somewhat hesitant to put oslo.bandit, openstack.bandit, etc because I don't want to discourage non-openstack projects from using it 17:07:43 I could see sec.bandit or something 17:07:53 +1 tmcpeak 17:07:54 I'd suggest a full name change 17:07:57 or we can just go full on rebrand 17:07:59 Yeah 17:08:09 So I don’t think making it openstack specific is sensible 17:08:16 hyakuhei: +1 17:08:26 Did we consider contacting the package owner? 17:08:26 chair6: ! 17:08:35 sigmavirus24: Yes but no reply yet afaik 17:08:36 sigmavirus24: I did yesterday 17:08:55 it seems like it has a fair amount of downloads, so I doubt he'd relinquish 17:08:56 It’s a pretty stale package by the looks of things 17:09:08 i say we wait on a reply for a few days 17:09:08 tmcpeak: that's likely mirrors 17:09:15 chair6: I'd say give it a week or more honestly 17:09:18 sigmavirus24: ahh yeah, good point 17:09:18 cl:q 17:09:23 yep, then talk about other options from there 17:09:28 If not, we can contact the PyPI administrators to see if we can reclaim the name 17:09:33 that seems like a good plan 17:09:44 (bandicoot may be trademarked fwiw) 17:09:45 ok, only downside is we really are completely blocked for moving ahead with our gate test in the meantime 17:10:09 I have a global requirements change ready to go, just pending a version number pin 17:10:15 seems easier to pick a new name. 17:10:17 openstack-infra folks really want that 17:10:25 the pinned version I mean 17:10:31 Yeah 17:10:32 renaming will take effort too though 17:10:49 it will also reset whatever name building we've already done 17:10:50 hold off, see if we get a response, blocked for a week is okay.. imho 17:11:10 ok, I'm fine with that 17:11:17 backup plan? 17:11:23 new name or append? 17:11:47 Might as well agree a new name in the meantime... 17:11:47 new name 17:11:53 chair6: +1 i think that seems like the best way to do it, backup should be contacting PyPI admins as sigmavirus24 suggested, after that look at rename I guess. Thoughts? 17:11:53 +1 for new name 17:12:10 ok 17:12:13 If we can't get bandit, +1 for a new name 17:12:55 bandido and bandito are both free in PyPI 17:12:58 let the name voting commence lol (this normally takes a while) 17:13:00 ok cool, that all seems sensible 17:13:05 I love bandito :P 17:13:16 bknudson suggested it might be culturally insensitive 17:13:23 yeah +1 bandito here :) 17:13:30 ahh right 17:13:36 -1 on bandito ... it has... other meanings 17:13:40 Also, more generally OSSG / Bandit - there’s a few reviews outstanding and it would be good to have other OSSG people looking at Bandit https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:stackforge/bandit+status:open,n,z 17:13:41 bandicoot 17:14:01 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandicoot 17:14:09 checking bad requirement is bogus… I did that for a test 17:14:12 I'll abandon soon 17:14:14 rofl @ urban dictionary / Bandito 17:14:22 actually both the bottom two are bogus 17:14:26 Lucas' is in flight 17:14:30 I think everything has an entry in urban dictionary by now. 17:14:31 -1 on bandicoot... it's taken: http://bandilab.org/ 17:14:32 great 17:14:33 we're pretty good with the reviews 17:14:50 if not we can make something up. 17:14:53 bdpayne: oh well 17:14:56 Anything else on the project we know as Bandit? 17:14:57 i'm actually quite annoying about this name thing .. it's completely breaking my name-all-the-tools-after-smokey-and-the-bandit-characters rule i have with this current employer 17:15:02 bpb_: bandicoot :D http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crash_Bandicoot_%28video_game%29 17:15:12 chair6: LOL 17:15:16 there must be other characters. 17:15:38 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076729/fullcredits/ 17:15:56 i'm already using smokey, and burdette, and cledus, and.. :) 17:16:06 we'll sort it out, and i'll survive 17:16:08 sugarbear? 17:16:15 lol 17:16:17 hotpants? Hmm... not sure 17:16:17 hotpants? 17:16:21 lol 17:16:23 sugarbear! 17:16:26 redbandit? my history tells me to always put two words together 17:16:26 using sugarbear already :) 17:16:56 so it's either hotpants or cledus then ;-) 17:16:57 Hehe. 17:17:10 trucker? 17:17:12 * ukbelch feels like he arrived at the wrong time 17:17:18 chair6 has cledus already 17:17:21 tkelsey: Is there much to report on Anchor ? 17:17:24 cledus +1 17:17:36 hotpants may be taken already for the next big CVE marketing name... 17:17:38 I'm afraid to lookup hotpants in urban dictionary. 17:17:45 hyakuhei: tests rolling in, stuff in review, thats about i t 17:17:47 *it 17:17:48 chair6: maybe you can swap your project names to one that doesn't require PyPI 17:17:50 Bandura? 17:18:29 what about tidnab? 17:18:35 codebandit, but taken a couple places 17:18:41 or secbandit 17:18:42 hot pants + urban dictionary = what's wrong with UK? 17:18:51 bdpayne: lol 17:18:52 it's very rainy there 17:19:03 roflcopter 17:19:17 bandicurity? 17:19:19 ok kids, lets talk about the meetup 17:19:23 pantsbandit 17:19:36 control is lost 17:19:41 sry 17:19:44 elmiko: we don't want people to think we're stealing pants now =P 17:19:47 #topic Security Meetup 17:19:51 Racoon 17:20:06 sigmavirus24: we dont? 17:20:20 elmiko: I'll explain later 17:20:36 I got approval to attend the meetup so am planning to be there. 17:20:43 Fantastic! 17:20:53 great! 17:20:53 The etherpad is here: #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ossg-kilo-meetup 17:20:54 awesome! 17:21:04 The agenda could still be stronger, I want to make the most of it 17:21:21 redrobot: Our plans need to be aligned too 17:21:30 At least where we want to do similar things... 17:21:32 hyakuhei agreed. 17:21:35 is barbican going to be there? 17:21:42 we can definitely talk about the Anchor->Barbican integration 17:21:45 Running in parallel in texas 17:21:50 Yeah 17:21:59 yes, we're scheduled for Feb 16-18 17:22:02 We’ll work out the best way 17:22:04 there was some confusion at the keystone meetup about where barbican was. 17:22:14 Hangouts? 17:22:37 bknudson sorry about that... I had originally planned to go, but some personal stuff came up that prevented me from going... :-\ 17:23:07 hyakuhei hangouts is pretty good, other than the 10 ppl cap... but I don't think that'll be an issue 17:23:27 cool, we’ll probably have a roomfull at teh OSSG end anyway :) 17:23:29 I wonder if we could setup a room with hangouts on a big screen 17:23:41 Any meetup related questions or queries 17:23:43 ? 17:24:00 +1 for Anchor <-> Barbican stuff 17:24:02 bdpayne we did that for the meetup last cycle for a remote contributor and it worked out well. 17:24:05 when you say that you want a strong agenda... what are you looking for? 17:24:06 (also hangouts can be livestreamed to twitter for people wishing to observe but not participate) 17:24:08 more? 17:24:10 more detail? 17:24:21 twitter? not youtube? :) 17:24:24 bdpayne: +1 17:24:35 I also want to run bandit on the barbican code base, but I've been slacking on it... gotta make some time for it soon. 17:24:51 redrobot: that would be very interesting 17:25:55 bdpayne: both really. 17:26:06 We are sending quite a few people :) 17:26:09 kk 17:26:22 #topic Summit 17:26:31 Who’s putting presentations in for the summit? 17:26:39 o/ 17:26:45 I'm working on one 17:27:01 need to touch base with nkinder on that 17:27:18 I’ll likely put in an abstract for the security group though I don’t know 100% if there’s a Security track atm. 17:27:39 I might... still tbd 17:27:41 there really should be a security track... 17:27:54 no security track again? that's a shame 17:28:16 security must be a solved problem. 17:28:17 All I’m saying is I’ve not had it confirmed 17:28:39 IT doesn’t sound like there’s many of us writing abstracts!? 17:28:57 I’ll put in a talk for Anchor too 17:29:00 bknudson: it is a solved problem. Rub some crypto on it. Done. 17:29:11 I know there are a number of barbican talks in the works 17:29:21 ...so those would all line up with a security track 17:29:35 there's a potential 3rd one coming from Nebula, too 17:29:42 I won't steal his thunder 17:29:52 but we will have 2 or 3 total 17:29:57 “Cloud Security” is at least a Topic listed on the CFP 17:31:03 #topic Ghosts (GLIBC) 17:31:15 Sooo, it’s been a fun few days... 17:31:30 tkelsey was looking at an OSSN 17:31:38 dg was I think 17:31:47 In the same way that we’ve produced OSSN’s for other big new-grabbing vulns 17:31:55 yeah dg wanted to do it, so I punted to him :) 17:31:59 tmcpeak: they both were but dg is late to the meeting so doesn’t get credit! 17:32:04 hah 17:32:06 haha ok, fair enough 17:32:12 lol, i'll take that :P 17:32:31 Ok, nkinder bdpayne thoughts on an OSSN for GLIBC/GHOST ? 17:32:57 Seems like it'd be pretty basic, but sure. 17:32:57 I'm kind of meh on it, tbh 17:33:07 Upgrade glibc 17:33:08 Also more widely has anyone identified any strong OpenStack vectors to get user controlled domain names into an OpenStack cloud? 17:33:24 I feel like Ghost has been a touch overhyped 17:33:42 designate possibly? 17:34:02 bdpayne: I share some of the sentiment 17:34:21 but I also think there’ll be other processes (than exim) shown to be exploitable over the coming weeks 17:34:46 and its a big coordinated release with a logo etc so it’s good for us to have something documented 17:34:57 I think otherwise it looks like an obvious gap in the OSSNs 17:35:02 sure, I'm not against it if someone wants to do it 17:35:07 hyakuhei: +1 17:35:16 Which, seem to have slowed down recently? nkinder is that the case? 17:35:51 they do seem less frequent 17:36:09 I'm not against it, but I do see us setting a precedent for releasing an OSSN for any CVE with a big splash 17:36:28 I don't really want to feel obligated to issue an OSSN just because of hype 17:36:54 speaking of OSSNs... I have a private security bug that may be an OSSN candidate 17:36:55 nkinder: No but these happen rarely, once or twice per year… ? 17:36:56 I guess more to the point, are we still issuing notes for OpenStack bugs which would have traditionally gotten them? 17:37:06 bdpayne: That’s exciting 17:37:22 well, sort of 17:37:24 it means that the VMT doesn't want it 17:37:31 tmcpeak: we should be 17:37:33 * bdpayne tries to find it 17:38:05 I did start drafting an OSSN in a spare moment yesterday, I'll try and get it finished and push it up, happy if we decide we dont need it thou. 17:38:23 tmcpeak: there's not much new in the queue that has been identified though (therre are some old ones though) 17:38:50 it looks like from here https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security_Notes some have been WIP for quite a while 17:38:54 tmcpeak: they just need to be picked up by anyone who has the spare cycles 17:39:23 So we could have a sprint on that at the Meetup? 17:39:25 nkinder and hyakuhei have a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.config/+bug/1395575 (for others, this is still private for now, sorry) 17:40:04 this vswitch one is a nightmare: • https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=OSSN/OSSN-0040&action=edit&redlink=1 - Neutron LBaaS VIP port does not enforce security groups when used with Open VSwitch (work in progress) 17:40:10 this might be what derailed the notes :) 17:40:26 bdpayne: interesting 17:40:41 Yeah interesting, VMT will punt that to OSSN I think 17:40:46 yeah 17:40:50 (without looking through the discussion) 17:41:16 VMT really manages very-nasty-exploits more than security flaws and design issues 17:41:20 That’s what we’re for :) 17:41:27 tmcpeak: the IdP one has some code going in which sort of resolves it, which I would like in the note 17:41:47 nkinder: ahh 17:41:50 I need to circle back and see if that has landed yet 17:42:24 idp one? 17:42:56 bknudson: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ossn/+bug/1390124 17:43:09 bknudson: this is one I discussed with Marek back in Paris 17:43:19 an ossn for that makes sense. 17:43:31 Yeah 17:43:34 the doc change in keystone is fix released already 17:43:47 ok, but there's a code change too IIRC 17:44:02 there was a spec discussed at the meetup... 17:44:11 where you can map an IdP identifier from the assertion and ensure it matches a particular IdP 17:44:17 it's actually a nastier problem than I thought. 17:44:32 yes, that was it. 17:44:54 SO right now, we could recommend a separate URL per IdP in the httpd.conf 17:45:16 ...and you tie the IdP specific metadata and cert checking to that URL 17:45:33 mod_shib or mod_auth_mellon will then protect that URL appropriately 17:46:13 So we can do an OSSN with what we recommend now and then mention that future changes in Keystone to do an additional check are being developed 17:46:37 that sounds good. 17:46:46 #topic Any Other Business 17:47:09 hyakuhei: i'd still like to do a hangout sometime, maybe we could look towards next week? 17:47:18 mainly for talking about hadoop sec issues 17:48:18 Yeah, we didn’t really get beyond trying to set a time… 17:49:11 no worries, we can just try again =) 17:49:16 :D 17:49:35 Is there any thing else to discuss with you fine people? 17:50:28 list of Anchor stuff in progress #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:stackforge/anchor+status:open,n,z 17:50:41 reviewers welcome :D 17:51:13 ok, I think that’s a wrap for today people :) 17:51:14 TY! 17:51:22 thanks 17:51:23 thanks hyakuhei 17:51:24 cool, see ya 17:51:25 thanks 17:51:27 #endmeeting