Review for Source Package: stubble
[Summary]
The essence of the review result from the MIR is that this is a necessary
package for arm64 support on Ubuntu and is recommended to be promoted to main
pending a security review. This is a UEFI-level package and is tested by the
ubuntu-boot-test package rather than traditional in-package testing.
MIR team ACK.
This does need a security review, so I'll assign ubuntu-security.
List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: stubble
Notes:
Recommended TODOs:
- The package should get a team bug subscriber before being promoted
[Rationale, Duplication and Ownership]
There is no other package in main providing the same functionality.
A team is committed to own long term maintenance of this package - Foundations.
The rationale given in the report seems valid and useful for Ubuntu.
[Dependencies]
OK:
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this
- SRCPKG checked with `check-mir`
- all dependencies can be found in `seeded-in-ubuntu` (already in main)
- none of the (potentially auto-generated) dependencies (Depends
and Recommends) that are present after build are not in main
- no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion
- No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring
more tests now.
Problems: None
[Embedded sources and static linking]
OK:
- no embedded source present
- no static linking
- does not have unexpected Built-Using entries
OK:
- not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- No vendoring used, all Built-Using are in main
- not a rust package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- Does not include vendored code
Problems: None
[Security]
OK:
- history of CVEs does not look concerning
- does not run a daemon as root
- does not use webkit1,2
- does not use lib*v8 directly
- does parse firmware-provided data structures - potentially untrusted sources
- does not expose any external endpoint (port/socket/... or similar)
- does not process arbitrary web content
- does not use centralized online accounts
- does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop
- does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc)
- does deal with security attestation
- does deal with cryptography (en-/decryption, certificates,
signing, ...)
Files such as sha1.c exist so some crypto primitives are present
- This runs pre-OS so AppArmor and other OS-level measures do not apply. I am
not familiar enough with UEFI security measures so I will defer to the
security team for their assessment.
Problems:
- No obvious security flaws in the package but due to my limited knowledge with
UEFI-level operations, I will get the opinion of the security team.
[Common blockers]
OK:
- does not FTBFS currently
- This is a UEFI-level package which makes it difficult to test on host. The
solution to this is integrating stubble into the Foundations bootloader test
suite with the device tree loading tested locally since it cannot easily be
simulated on a VM. Each stubble upload triggers an autopkgtest for
ubuntu-boot-test[1][2] which in turn tests stubble.
[1]https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-team/+git/ubuntu-boot-test/tree/README.md
[2]https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-uefi-team/+git/ubuntu-boot-test/tree/debian/tests/control?id=29206771d452d662d583da65ff56c72655a5ea29#n71
- This does seem to need special HW for build or test so it can't be
automatic at build or autopkgtest time. But as outlined
by the requester in [Quality assurance - testing] there:
- is hardware and a test plan or code
- a simulator and a test plan or code
(see Common Blockers section links for ubuntu-boot-test infrastructure)
- no new python2 dependency
Problems: None
[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does not carry a delta.
- symbols tracking not applicable for this kind of code.
- debian/watch is not present but also not needed (e.g. native)
- Upstream update history is good
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is good
- the current release is packaged
- promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far
maintained the package
- no massive Lintian warnings
- debian/rules is rather clean
- It is not on the lto-disabled list
Problems: None
[Upstream red flags]
OK:
- no Errors/warnings during the build
- no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it)
- no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside
tests)
- no use of user 'nobody' outside of tests
- no use of setuid / setgid
- no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu
- no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit or libseed
- not part of the UI for extra checks
- no translation present, but none needed for this case (user visible)?
Problems: None
** Changed in: stubble (Ubuntu Questing)
Assignee: Myles Penner (mylesjp) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2120322
Title:
[MIR] stubble
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/stubble/+bug/2120322/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
