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

DevX SOC2 compliance: repo rollout #30427

Closed
7 tasks done
Tracked by #31008
bobheadxi opened this issue Jan 31, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by #31687
Closed
7 tasks done
Tracked by #31008

DevX SOC2 compliance: repo rollout #30427

bobheadxi opened this issue Jan 31, 2022 · 8 comments · Fixed by #31687
Assignees

Comments

@jhchabran
Copy link
Member

@bobheadxi Checking the docs, I don't see a mention about deploy-sourcegraph-cloud, which seems to be a wrapper on top of the single docker instance.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, it's a bit of a gray area because it's not a "product" that we are advertising explicitly, but we aren't either saying that it's not.

I see two paths there:

  • We ask the owners if they're ok with dealing with the test plans, if they agree, we wire it.
  • We make it explicit that it's not a supported product and thus we don't cover it.

For lsif-indexers, they are sub-components and if we were to have them within sourcegraph/sourcegraph they would be logically covered. So I think they should be part of the test plan process.

@bobheadxi
Copy link
Member Author

bobheadxi commented Feb 23, 2022

@jhchabran deploy-sourcegraph-cloud is sourcegraph.com! 😛 I think you mean https://github.com/sourcegraph/deploy-sourcegraph-aws ? You're right on the following though I think:

So, correct me if I'm wrong, it's a bit of a gray area because it's not a "product" that we are advertising explicitly, but we aren't either saying that it's not.

I will reach out to Delivery regarding:

slack thread

For lsif-indexers, they are sub-components and if we were to have them within sourcegraph/sourcegraph they would be logically covered. So I think they should be part of the test plan process.

lsif-indexers are not sub-components, but standalone projects:

Other seemingly related projects:

Speaking of which, I'm guessing we need these as well:

@bobheadxi
Copy link
Member Author

bobheadxi commented Feb 23, 2022

This was referenced Feb 23, 2022
@bobheadxi
Copy link
Member Author

bobheadxi commented Mar 2, 2022

Got redirected to security re: access questions: https://sourcegraph.slack.com/archives/C1JH2BEHZ/p1646181694003409

If that's a no-go, Michael mentioned that we can explore GitHub Apps: https://docs.github.com/en/developers/apps/getting-started-with-apps/differences-between-github-apps-and-oauth-apps#token-based-identification

Requested reviews for most repositories, which is a manual process. Some repositories also need manual intervention for linter exceptions

@bobheadxi
Copy link
Member Author

bobheadxi commented Mar 7, 2022

Got confirmation last week from security, pinged it-tech-ops again this week to set up write access for all: https://sourcegraph.slack.com/archives/C01CSS3TC75/p1646675404295489

I am going to merge unreviewed PRs in the batch change now, which is nice and easy with the batch change bulk action but is creating a lot of spam... oh well, at least we know it works 😛

image

This was referenced Mar 7, 2022
@bobheadxi
Copy link
Member Author

There are still some unpublished changesets that were captured in the initial batch change query, but I am opting not to action these because they appear abandoned or are internal tooling:

image

You can see the full set of repositories that had this rolled out here: https://k8s.sgdev.org/users/robert/batch-changes/pr-auditor-rollout?status=MERGED&visible=50

And with that I'm calling it wraps and closing this issue! cc @jhchabran @sourcegraph/security

@jhchabran
Copy link
Member

@bobheadxi thanks for taking on this grueling task 🙏💪, well done 🚀

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 a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants