Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Continuous Monitoring of npm audit results #48

Closed
petermetz opened this issue Nov 15, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Continuous Monitoring of npm audit results #48

petermetz opened this issue Nov 15, 2019 · 1 comment
Assignees
@petermetz
Labels
dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file enhancement New feature or request good-first-issue Good for newcomers Security Related to existing or potential security vulnerabilities

Comments

@petermetz
Copy link
Contributor

petermetz commented Nov 15, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Tying the CI success to npm audit is not a good idea because the CI could then break without the source code having changed at all.
Instead have monitoring/alerting set up somehow (maybe as part of the CI script and a webhook/callout) or just as a sticker on the README.
@petermetz petermetz self-assigned this Nov 15, 2019
@petermetz petermetz pinned this issue Nov 25, 2019
@petermetz petermetz unpinned this issue Dec 3, 2019
@petermetz petermetz changed the title CI success to be contingent on npm audit success Continuous Monitoring of npm audit results Dec 3, 2019
@petermetz petermetz added dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file enhancement New feature or request good-first-issue Good for newcomers Security Related to existing or potential security vulnerabilities labels May 27, 2020
@petermetz petermetz modified the milestone: v0.2.0 May 27, 2020
@petermetz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Update 1: Decided against tying CI success to the audit outcome because it would just make it flaky and often impossible to fix since patches don't get rolled out immediately for all the vulnerabilities.
A contribution should still be acceptable if it has some npm audit issues that we can fix later on. The reasoning behind that is that the npm audit outcomes are fluid and time dependent so trying to mandate a positive outcome for npm audit is futile and does not itself guarantee the software to be secure, in fact the opposite is a well known secret: all software is insecure until proven otherwise (and the latter has been proven to be impossible in general).

So with all that in mind, retiring this issue.

ryjones pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2023
@sandeepnRES
fungible renamed to token, mocks removed added makefile, other minor …
645b54d 
…changes related to PR #48

Signed-off-by: sandeep.nishad1 <sandeep.nishad1@ibm.com>
ryjones pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2023
@VRamakrishna
Merge pull request #48 from sanvenDev/main
9251486 
Sample Chaincode for Asset lifecycle management for Bond and Fungible Asset.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@petermetz petermetz

Labels
dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file enhancement New feature or request good-first-issue Good for newcomers Security Related to existing or potential security vulnerabilities
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@petermetz