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.

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

Found Security program #537

Open
yangwao opened this issue Jul 4, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Found Security program #537

yangwao opened this issue Jul 4, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
p5 ideas for future security stale

Comments

@yangwao
Copy link
Member

yangwao commented Jul 4, 2021

Security program

  • what should be bounties for funding security risks? Do Treasury cover payments?
  • Should be hired upfront audit company?
  • Do you know someone who can help us on-demand basis, whenever we will introduce new features, write ink! or ask! code for smart contracts?

Reasoning:
As we've left out some un-used 📦 in our code and some security experts thoughts are a high-risk issues, where Textile wasn't used for anything critical anymore, since we implemented Subquery - #535, #533 - Twitter

Meanwhile, we've got an A grade on headers
image

@yangwao yangwao added the p5 ideas for future label Jul 4, 2021
@x676f64
Copy link

x676f64 commented Jul 4, 2021

You will want to have an internal discussion about methods for incentivizing security researchers to take part in your bug bounty program. I would also suggest creating a responsible disclosure program in conjunction with your bug bounty program to create a pathway for reporting vulnerabilities securely. You can look to Parity to see what they have done in this space.

https://www.parity.io/bug-bounty/
https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/blob/master/docs/SECURITY.md

I also highly recommend implementing a security.txt record on your KodaDot properties: https://securitytxt.org/

Regarding item #2, I would definitely recommend integrating regular source code reviews, security audits, and penetration tests into your CI/CD pipeline as features and functions are added or removed from the Kodadot codebase. How often you do those is up to you of course.

yangwao added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 5, 2021
@yangwao
Copy link
Member Author

yangwao commented Jan 27, 2022

You will want to have an internal discussion about methods for incentivizing security researchers to take part in your bug bounty program. I would also suggest creating a responsible disclosure program in conjunction with your bug bounty program to create a pathway for reporting vulnerabilities securely. You can look to Parity to see what they have done in this space.

https://www.parity.io/bug-bounty/
https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/blob/master/docs/SECURITY.md

We will crack on that in upcoming Meta_hours_4 #2007

I also highly recommend implementing a security.txt record on your KodaDot properties: https://securitytxt.org/

#2089 yes we will nail it down soon

Regarding item #2, I would definitely recommend integrating regular source code reviews, security audits, and penetration tests into your CI/CD pipeline as features and functions are added or removed from the Kodadot codebase. How often you do those is up to you of course.

#1858 will be there

We will be posted on the https://www.huntr.dev/ to drive more security researchers.

@yangwao
Copy link
Member Author

yangwao commented Jan 28, 2022

huntr.dev is over capacity what I received response.

Any good other hints?

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 3, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in last 720 days. It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. Please @kodadot/internal
feel free to leave a comment if you believe the issue is still relevant. Thank you for your contributions!

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Aug 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
p5 ideas for future security stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants