HN user

wallrat

31 karma

Currently at sbom.observer (Bytesafe). @wallrat on Twitter

Posts8
Comments22
View on HN

Very well written (as expected) argument for RSC. It's interesting to see the parallels with Inertia.js.

(a bit sad to see all the commenters that clearly haven't read the article though)

Still have the Turbo Pascal 1.0 manual on my shelf. It was the first language I picked up after Basic and QuickBasic as a child.

Wrote a couple of interesting things a few years later in TP 5.5, including a BBS/Kom system and a MUD (with 4 dial-in lines).

Found the source a few years back, was an interesting read a few decades later.

Next step ist to establish good tooling around publishing VEX statements (Vulnerability Exploitability Exchange). That is currently not easy.

Agreed.

Tooling is needed for creating/publishing/consuming both VEX statements for applications (i.e. exploitability of a dependency in context), but also VEX statements from library authors (many times the actual experts, like the OP) as a way dispute the weakness/exploitability.

Currently working hard on this [1]. When the tooling is in place the next step for the industry will be discoverability of SBOM/VEX/VDR attestations. Sigstore/Rekor [2] looks to be a viable alternative here.

Vulnerabilities are reported (using CPE, pURL etc.) at the "library" or "application" level but they really exist at a much more granular level (e.g. a single function is affected and if that's not used there's no problem).

Again, agreed. Reachability info needs to be commoditized, standardized and shared. The current situation where it's a feature used by vendors to compete is not ideal.

[1] <https://sbom.observer> [2] <https://www.sigstore.dev>

The best kind of "problem" to have. Expect to build features, integrations and other customizations, and factor in the costs. You can do that with a higher "base" price, or include professional services into the contract (but be careful with IP rights). Use a per-seat model internally (more users = more support etc) and offer fixed price point per year. Expect to them to want to negotiate a large discount on the "list" price, so start higher than you might think.

DISCLOSURE: I'm working on commercial tooling for this exact problem [1]

1) What would your expectations be towards a software vendor in terms of what issues to "fix"?

I would want the vendor to communicate their analysis for all CVEs, i.e. letting us know which are exploitable or not, and what kind of response they are planning, or any fixes released.

There are efforts to standardize this workflow with Vulnerability Disclosure Reports (VDRs)[2] and Vulnerability Exploitability eXchange VEXs[3]. Both these use cases are covered by OWASP CycloneDx[4].

2) Is anyone aware of a security database & evaluation tool geared for vendors not for end-users?

IMHO, there are not any good tools available that solve the complete workflow. We are certainly aiming to fix that with[1], but it will take some time.

[1] https://sbom.observer

[2] https://www.cisa.gov/resources-tools/resources/minimum-requi...

[3] https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-161/rev-1/f...

[4] https://cyclonedx.org/capabilities/vex/

An Intro to SBOMs 3 years ago

Interesting. Do you keep the SBOMs around after the build to track what's running in production?

An Intro to SBOMs 3 years ago

Are SBOMs a "thing" yet? Is anybody using SBOMs in their day to day workflows?

The current tooling for generating them seems to have matured, but tools for storing and managing an SBOM inventory seem non-existent with exception for OWASP Dependency-Track.

Same here.

Last week it was needing Redis slaves to handle 'SLAVEOF NO ONE' from the master without crashing. Needed to tell all read-slaves (hundreds) to stop trying to reconnect when taking the master down.

It's fine balance though, you don't want to be stuck with too many forks to maintain.

I've spent the last couple of months trying to relieve the pains of running Redis in the cloud. I think we have come up with a rock solid backend which allows for some awesome tools and functionality.

Some highlights:

  - We support multiple clouds, Amazon US-EAST available now, 
    with beta customers testing Amazon EU-West and Rackspace. 
    More to come!
  - Your choice of Redis version. Use 2.6 RC-5 with Lua and BIT-operations.
  - A command-line tool we're happy with.
  - Simple master/slave replication config
We have a lot of interesting features coming up; secure internet access, highly available endpoints (handles server and isolation zone failures for clients), Redis analytics.

As a side note, the backend (and website) is 95% clojure and is a joy to hack on!

Your feedback is appreciated!

Coffeekup 15 years ago

Looks pragmatic and useful. I've been experimenting with a similar implementation inspired by Clojure's Hiccup, but Coffekup looks mature enough to consider adopting.

Alternative if you don't have wmctrl installed (not default in Ubuntu for example):

  ;; Fullscreen
  (defun switch-full-screen ()
    (interactive)
    (x-send-client-message nil 0 nil "_NET_WM_STATE" 32
                           '(2 "_NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN" 0)))