15:02:10 #startmeeting security 15:02:11 Meeting started Thu Mar 28 15:02:10 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is gagehugo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:02:12 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:02:14 The meeting name has been set to 'security' 15:02:23 ping fungi gagehugo lhinds nickthetait browne redrobot 15:02:29 aloha 15:02:31 hi 15:02:32 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-agenda agenda 15:02:34 o/ 15:02:37 I'm actually here this week :) 15:02:42 \o/ 15:03:16 give it another couple minutes and then we can get started 15:05:15 #topic help most needed for SIGS & WGs 15:05:29 #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004246.html 15:05:43 fungi: I took a look at the email 15:06:06 cool, just wanted to make sure it was on the radar 15:07:04 I'll attend that forum too 15:07:07 in Denver 15:07:25 #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23612/help-most-needed-for-sigs-and-wgs 15:08:00 #topic security-analysis reviewers wanted 15:08:09 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/security-analysis+is:open 15:08:20 the security-analysis repo hasn't seen much love 15:09:03 yeah, i was putting together a list of the various security-related efforts within the community, in part as a response to this: 15:09:15 #link https://www.eweek.com/search-engines/envoy-cncf-project-completes-security-audit-delivers-new-release 15:09:41 osf board members are asking about whether we should be doing something similar 15:10:14 and at the moment the closest thing we have is the security analysis effort, but we have more pending merge than we have published 15:10:46 :) 15:10:49 so wanted to make sure this was highlighted as a way people interested in improving the security posture of openstack can help make a huge difference 15:11:41 who has +2 powers for security-analysis? 15:11:55 is that the security-doc-core group? 15:12:29 looking 15:12:45 almost certain I don't 15:13:12 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/security-doc-core 15:13:14 yep 15:13:32 that could stand to be refreshed/updated 15:13:37 o/ 15:13:46 i leave the decisions around that to the sig chairs 15:14:04 if we want to get things moving, then I'd say yes 15:14:07 ricolin o/ 15:14:12 sounds like a great idea 15:14:41 is this the merge you were talking about fungi? https://review.openstack.org/#/c/648245/ 15:15:47 nickthetait: no, i meant we have many more security-analysis additions proposed for review than we've approved for publication 15:15:57 gotcha 15:16:06 #link https://docs.openstack.org/security-analysis/ 15:16:17 at the moment that's just barbican 15:16:42 and dated current as of newton (going on 2.5 years) 15:17:19 on a related note, i see that the security guide says it's current as of pike: 15:17:22 #link https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/ 15:17:37 so 1.5 years behind 15:17:42 heh 15:17:44 :o 15:18:02 looks like there's been some occasional updating in it: 15:18:06 #link https://opendev.org/openstack/security-doc/commits/branch/master 15:18:19 though it could probably stand to get a bit of attention as well 15:18:26 Yeah 15:18:51 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/security-doc+is:open 15:19:21 looks like there are a couple of new changes up for review today 15:19:32 but nothing really backlogged for review there 15:19:48 so i guess we're more in need of people going through and refreshing content than reviewing in that case 15:19:59 sure 15:21:11 how can we identify the most urgent topics needing update? 15:23:17 good question 15:23:19 that's a great question and i don't have an answer. i think if someone familiar with the current state of openstack software were to skim the existing content and then either tweak stuff that needs tweaking or just update the list of releases for which it's applicable if everything looks accurate still, that would be a big improvement 15:23:41 hmm okay 15:24:10 ok 15:25:14 uh oh spam 15:25:28 yeah, just saw the wallops from freenode staff 15:25:44 fungi: what do you think the next steps then are? 15:26:02 look into refreshing what is there for now? 15:26:42 identify new security features that aren't even mentioned yet? 15:26:47 what i said above, yeah. for someone who has a deeper understanding of operating current versions of openstack to read through and confirm what we say in there is still correct 15:26:58 ok 15:27:35 adding new features would be swell too, absolutely, but i think more important is to make sure what's already in there isn't incorrect in light of whatever's changed in the past 1.5 years in openstack 15:28:00 fair point 15:28:19 basically folks landing at the security guide right now are likely to get the impression they should avoid any releases newer than pike 15:28:26 lol 15:28:28 sound good 15:28:37 new releases are scary sometimes 15:28:42 * redrobot sneaks in the back and pretends he's been here all along 15:29:02 * nickthetait retroactively says hi to redrobot 15:29:21 ricolin o/ 15:29:32 wanna quickly talk about http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004246.html ? 15:29:40 :) 15:30:49 So it's about what Security SIG needed the most 15:31:28 in terms of technical or non-technical goal will be both fine 15:31:50 ok 15:31:51 We have discussion in a forum about expose SIGs 15:32:00 I mean last summit 15:32:19 https://www.openstack.org/summit/denver-2019/summit-schedule/events/23612/help-most-needed-for-sigs-and-wgs 15:32:25 I saw that ^ 15:32:38 And this needed the most for SIGs/WGs is consider as an action from that forum 15:32:42 heh, today's meeting agenda is all about things we need help with, so that's excellent timnig 15:32:50 ^ 15:32:53 fungi, yay! 15:32:59 ricolin https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/security-agenda 15:33:01 :) 15:33:38 the meeting minutes/logs will probably be a more useful representation as we also verged into discussing the languishing state of the security guide 15:33:47 yeah 15:34:41 I assume we can list all, but needed the most list is also a way to encourage project teams to help if we tell them this is an important goal for Security SIG 15:35:10 ricolin we can scribe our notes into something for the security sig goals 15:35:18 that will be awesome 15:35:32 gagehugo, that will be very helpful 15:35:52 :) 15:36:41 If we can tell PTLs what is the most important security issues in OpenStack, maybe we can have chance to find more people join the Security goal discussion/action 15:37:19 that sounds good 15:37:20 I mean that's part of the mission for that forum 15:37:47 they're unlikely to realize that the biggest security "issues" in openstack are documentation related 15:37:47 ricolin I currently plan on being there so I can attend that forum as well 15:38:05 fungi: we can put documentation first heh 15:38:23 maybe in big bold letters 15:38:48 this sort of takes us into the last topic i added to the agenda as well. i think the etherpad i've linked there may provide a good start for a list of things we would like help on 15:38:59 gagehugo, that will be awesome 15:39:17 cool 15:39:19 fungi: sure 15:39:31 #topic security audit discussion 15:40:27 so the leaders of osf open infrastructure projects including the openstack tc will be meeting with the osf board of directors on the sunday before the summit in denver 15:40:46 3rd party openstack auditing huh? 15:40:53 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/denver-joint-leadership-meeting the pad to brainstorm topics of disucssion 15:41:22 yes, alan (current board chair) mentioned third-party software audits as a possible topic of discussion 15:41:48 i did my best to prep a briefing there as to what we currently do and strive for 15:42:16 quite a bit there 15:42:44 i'm looking for suggestions for things i may have missed, but also i think this makes a possible outline for what ricolin talked about 15:43:08 the existence of this sig is of course first on the list ;) 15:43:18 I know the best practices guide is slightly out of date 15:43:25 in some areas at least 15:43:40 * gagehugo sees PKI tokens in the identity section 15:44:42 fungi: I can take a look over it, but imo it looks like you covered it pretty well 15:45:21 cool, i didn't want to chew up a bunch of meeting time on it, but in the interest of transparency i wanted to make sure everyone interested had an opportunity to be involved in what we might talk about 15:45:47 :) 15:46:18 * gagehugo has another meeting in a minute 15:46:22 the third-party auditing bit is, in my opinion, cncf looking for ways to utilize its surplus cashflow. osf lacks similar financial resources 15:46:23 Anything else real quick? 15:46:40 nope, i'm tapped out. thanks for chairing! 15:46:40 fungi: that makes sense 15:47:02 external audit might be a good idea for official support 15:47:09 thanks for coming everyone! 15:47:11 nothing new from me 15:47:11 o/ 15:47:12 laters 15:47:16 have a good weekend 15:47:20 you too! 15:47:26 ping me in openstack-security if there's anything else 15:47:30 #endmeeting