Re: Publishing dependency vulnerability information

2022-12-04 Thread David Smiley
Yeah, we want to maintain this in as few places as possible -- ideally one place. But I think it's *adequate* albeit not ideal to have our more pretty/user-consumably documentation refer to a raw file that a user would have to search. We shouldn't let the ideal be the enemy of progress. ~ David

Re: Publishing dependency vulnerability information

2022-11-30 Thread Jan Høydahl
Good thoughts here. I have also thought about possibly moving the list of false positives from wiki to the website. It could be a JSON file or whatever parsable file, and we can parse it in Javascript and output it as a table. At the same time we could offer simple search/filtering both across

Re: Publishing dependency vulnerability information

2022-11-30 Thread Arnout Engelen
On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 4:36 PM Mike Drob wrote: > From my understanding, SBOM are meaningful in the context of a release, not > necessarily an arbitrary code point. VEX on the other hand could be updated > between releases as information comes in about new CVEs and such. I think > that’s an impor

Re: Publishing dependency vulnerability information

2022-11-30 Thread Mike Drob
Hi Arnout, Thanks for starting this conversation, I have had similar thoughts recently but hadn’t put them to action yet. >From my understanding, SBOM are meaningful in the context of a release, not necessarily an arbitrary code point. VEX on the other hand could be updated between releases as in