...
| Jira No | Summary | Description | Status | Solution | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Last TSC meeting |
| ongoing | Work with Seshu and Jess on PoC prepration. | |||||||
| Last PTLs meeting | not Finally executed, but SECCOM message remains: -Status update for Global Requirement (https://jira.onap.org/browse/REQ-863): -Thank you all the project taking part of recommended packages upgrades. -All other projects not compliant with this requirement will have issues with SECCOM acceptance to be part of the Istanbul release. | ongoing | to close tickets for projects not participating in Istanbul release - done. | |||||||
Software BOMs, Hardware BOMs - Muddasar | Options to be discussed next week i.e. the format to use (3 formats discussed last time), authorship (with company affiliation for accountability). First software side to be moved forward and then to be followed by hardware BOM. PoC proposal by Fabian - select some software module and define what is the atomic level, create BOM. Individual code contribution should be tracked back to individual name. | ongoing | Security Event Generation Requirements review (Byung/Chaker/Fabian/Amy): | ONAP Security Event Management - DRAFT Major focus on generation and collection. VES events are generated by service containers. We are focussed on platform containers logs generation. Apache2 Web server has well defined message logging formats based on set of attributes. Retention period is very operator specific. Let's write logs to stdout and stderr. | ongoing | Log file metadata part of the component to be elaborated. | We follow PoC idea - first we take a look at the CI/CD pipeline, collect the data and store it as we want it., who is the consumer in ONAP framework, we will have to select one of three formats discussed during the last session. Can SBOM be created directly from NEXUS? Hardware BOM is slightly different from process perspective. | ongoing | Workflow for the pilot to be prepared by Muddasar. Exchanges with Jess to be progressed - detailed request to be sent by Muddasar. | |
| Seccom criteria for the integration tests to pass a release | Just a reminder of the current status:
| ongoing | ||||||||
Security Risk Assessment and Acceptance – revisit Brian’s statement | To be discussed next week. | |||||||||
CII Badging update - Tony | To be discussed next week. | |||||||||
| Dependency confusion attacks vs. ONAP SW build process | To be discussed next week. | ongoing | Wiki page to be check by Samuli.Code quality and SonarCloud – achievements deck prepared by Fabian to be presented to TSC on August 12th. | Slot is booked and slides uploaded. Fabian is ready to present the deck to TSC. | ongoing | |||||
SECCOM-269 is the epic for tracking security integration tests. It is blocked by the following project jiras. | ongoing | Some more waivers might be submitted. | ||||||||
| LFN Security Group – focus, outcomes, contributions | Kick-off meeting scheduled on 18th of August.
| ongoing | ||||||||
| OUR NEXT SECCOM MEETING CALL WILL BE HELD ON 17th OF AUGUST'21. | Software BOMs Logging requirements Security Risk Assessment and Acceptance – revisit Brian’s statement Dependency confusion attacks vs. ONAP SW build process |
...