Skip to content

Rewrite - Vulnerability Management for Maintainers #129

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ms-jcorley
Copy link
Contributor

Second part of the updates to the Vulnerability Management documentation.
This is a rewrite of the policies around how maintainers should handle vulnerabilities to match both actual practices and bring consistency to them.

@ms-jcorley ms-jcorley requested a review from a team as a code owner June 4, 2025 22:48
If Maintainers need assistance with how to handle a security vulnerability:

1. For general guidance of a non sensitive nature, Contact the Security SIG
through the #otel-sig-security channel in the Cloud Native Slack workspace.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
through the #otel-sig-security channel in the Cloud Native Slack workspace.
through the [#otel-sig-security](https://cloud-native.slack.com/archives/C05A85QC281) channel in the CNCF Slack workspace.

Comment on lines +193 to +194
2. For sensitive guidance specific to an Advisory, reach out to Security SIG
Maintainers as they have access to all Advisories and can comment directly in
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
2. For sensitive guidance specific to an Advisory, reach out to Security SIG
Maintainers as they have access to all Advisories and can comment directly in
2. For sensitive guidance specific to an Advisory, reach out to [Security SIG
Maintainers](https://github.com/open-telemetry/sig-security#maintainers) as they have access to all Advisories and can comment directly in

1. **Direct Vulnerabilities**: Always request a CVE when a vulnerability exists
in OTel's own code that could expose users to security risks.

2. **Dependency Vulnerabilities**: Request a CVE if:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
2. **Dependency Vulnerabilities**: Request a CVE if:
2. **Dependency Vulnerabilities**: Request a CVE if these are all true:


Note that the vulnerability impact for the OTel executable may be different
than for the dependency that caused it, depending on how it is used. Do not
assume that the OTel CVE must have the same score as the dependency's CVE.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

Comment on lines +231 to +232
- The vulnerability only affects consumers who explicitly import both the
OTel library and the vulnerable dependency
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suspect that most dependencies are brought in transitively without explicit import

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

also, similar bullets as above probably apply to libraries:

  • The executable uses the vulnerable part of the dependency
  • The vulnerability can be exploited through the executable's usage patterns
  • The vulnerability creates a security impact for users of the executable

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

can we have a threshold (Medium or lower) for transitive dependencies that we don't even need to do the analysis for? (as long as we are rolling update into next monthly release)

Comment on lines +127 to +129
vulnerability details before a fix is available.
3. Only add Collaborators who are necessary for investigating or fixing the
issue.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
vulnerability details before a fix is available.
3. Only add Collaborators who are necessary for investigating or fixing the
issue.
vulnerability details before a fix is available.
3. Only add Collaborators who are necessary for investigating or fixing the
issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants