[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080603161200.GA9417@steve.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 17:12:01 +0100
From: Steve Kemp <steve@...ve.org.uk>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: code reviews (was: ARP handler Inspection tool
released)
On Mon Jun 02, 2008 at 18:10:53 +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> I feel that it'd be nice if a list existed where one could ask for some
> source code to be reviewed - and get useful feedback. We had the
> security-audit list in late 1990s that kind of worked like that;
> Do we have people like the security-audit activists of late 1990s in
> here? (I know that some of the same people are in fact in here, but I'm
> sure that they have changed - similarly to the way I have changed. So I
> mean people "like" those who were active on security-audit at the time
> and who are in this shape now.)
I setup the Debian security audit project with the intention that
people would volunteer to do this. I guess I found 20-50 issues of
pretty low severity in my stint, and had hoped to find more.
The specific problem at the time the audit was started was that
very few people had the time, the skills, and the motivation to
join in and help.
Optimistically if there were people volunteering here I'd be willing
to spend more of my time on that kind of work myself. Pessimistically
people find the work time-consuming and difficult. Without a few big
holes found early on many many people lose interest.
(Me personally I found my time was taken up with other issues, and
from memory the most prolific auditors that I managed to hook up with
managed to get jobs in the security field and so they started auditing
behind closed doors - at least one person told me he was no longer
allowed to take part in public audits. Understandable, but
frustrating.)
> I find it highly unlikely that anyone, even
> the kind of people I mentioned above, would bother downloading a tarball
> of something they had never heard of to do a security audit of it -
> unless this is paid work.
Indeed.
My initial aim was to divide the Debian archive into "high" and "low"
risk packages and then only look at the high-risk ones. (Where
high-risk meant setuid/setgid or network accessible.)
Random programs that people point me at aren't terribly interesting
*unless* I happen to use them myself! ;)
> Now, do any/all of you find my posting appropriate? ;-)
Yes!
One interesting recent development I was watching was the google
audits. I know nothing of the details, but I do recall that several
issues were reported to vendor sec with a "google audit" "ownership".
Steve
--
http://www.steve.org.uk/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
