KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Juan Quintela]

Hi

Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.

Thanks, Juan.

Call details:

15:00 CEST
13:00 UTC
09:00 EDT

Every two weeks

If you need phone number details,  contact me privately.

RE: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Venkateswara Rao Nandigam]

What is the Phone numbers of the call?

-----Original Message-----
From: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Juan Quintela
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 1:13 PM
To: KVM devel mailing list; qemu list
Subject: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28


Hi

Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.

Thanks, Juan.

Call details:

15:00 CEST
13:00 UTC
09:00 EDT

Every two weeks

If you need phone number details,  contact me privately.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Juan Quintela]

Venkateswara Rao Nandigam <venkateswararao.nandigam@citrix.com> wrote:
> What is the Phone numbers of the call?

Can you told me where you are based, and I can search for 


I hope one of the numbers is good for you O:-)

Bi-weekly conference to discuss kvm and qemu issues. 

Conference Code: 5402697718 

For the phone numbers, visit that page:

https://www-emea.intercallonline.com/listNumbersByCode.action?confCode=5402697718

If you have any problem, let me know.


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org] On
> Behalf Of Juan Quintela
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 1:13 PM
> To: KVM devel mailing list; qemu list
> Subject: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28
>
>
> Hi
>
> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
>
> Thanks, Juan.
>
> Call details:
>
> 15:00 CEST
> 13:00 UTC
> 09:00 EDT
>
> Every two weeks
>
> If you need phone number details,  contact me privately.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Markus Armbruster]

Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:

> Hi
>
> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.

[...]

I'd like to have these things settled sooner than five minutes before
the scheduled hour, so here goes: call or no call?  Agenda?

Re: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 05:34:34PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi
> >
> > Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
> 
> [...]
> 
> I'd like to have these things settled sooner than five minutes before
> the scheduled hour, so here goes: call or no call?  Agenda?

If not too late, I'd like to discuss our security process.
Do we as the project generally agree to use responsible disclosure policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_disclosure ?

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Peter Maydell]

On 29 April 2014 06:51, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> If not too late, I'd like to discuss our security process.
> Do we as the project generally agree to use responsible disclosure policy
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_disclosure ?

I think something like that makes sense. I'm a bit wary that
we write up some complicated policy that we're not then
in practice capable of executing given our level of resources.
We should certainly write out some documentation though...

thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 09:56:19AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 29 April 2014 06:51, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > If not too late, I'd like to discuss our security process.
> > Do we as the project generally agree to use responsible disclosure policy
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_disclosure ?
> 
> I think something like that makes sense. I'm a bit wary that
> we write up some complicated policy that we're not then
> in practice capable of executing given our level of resources.
> We should certainly write out some documentation though...
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM

I didn't have anything complex in mind.

Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
following:
http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess

-- 
MST

Re: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Peter Maydell]

On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
> following:
> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess

Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.

thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Markus Armbruster]

Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:

> On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
>> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
>> following:
>> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess
>
> Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
> anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.

The first paragraph under "How to Contact Us Securely" is fine, the rest
seems redundant for readers familiar with PGP, yet hardly sufficient for
the rest.

One thing I like about Libvirt's Security Process page[*] is they give
an idea on embargo duration.


[*] http://libvirt.org/securityprocess.html

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:33:58PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
> 
> > On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
> >> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
> >> following:
> >> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess
> >
> > Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
> > anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.
> 
> The first paragraph under "How to Contact Us Securely" is fine, the rest
> seems redundant for readers familiar with PGP, yet hardly sufficient for
> the rest.
> 
> One thing I like about Libvirt's Security Process page[*] is they give
> an idea on embargo duration.
> 
> 
> [*] http://libvirt.org/securityprocess.html

I don't have an idea though. Do you?
Let's try the process for a while, see how well we manage
in practice.

Re: KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:33:58PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
> 
> > On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
> >> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
> >> following:
> >> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess
> >
> > Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
> > anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.
> 
> The first paragraph under "How to Contact Us Securely" is fine, the rest
> seems redundant for readers familiar with PGP, yet hardly sufficient for
> the rest.
> 
> One thing I like about Libvirt's Security Process page[*] is they give
> an idea on embargo duration.

FWIW I picked the "2 weeks" length myself a completely arbitrary timeframe.
We haven't stuck to that strictly - we consider needs of each vulnerability
as it is triaged to determine the minimum practical embargo time. So think
of "2 weeks" as more of a guiding principal to show the world that we don't
believe in keeping issues under embargo for very long periods of time.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Markus Armbruster]

"Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:33:58PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
>> >> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
>> >> following:
>> >> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess
>> >
>> > Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
>> > anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.
>> 
>> The first paragraph under "How to Contact Us Securely" is fine, the rest
>> seems redundant for readers familiar with PGP, yet hardly sufficient for
>> the rest.
>> 
>> One thing I like about Libvirt's Security Process page[*] is they give
>> an idea on embargo duration.
>
> FWIW I picked the "2 weeks" length myself a completely arbitrary timeframe.
> We haven't stuck to that strictly - we consider needs of each vulnerability
> as it is triaged to determine the minimum practical embargo time. So think
> of "2 weeks" as more of a guiding principal to show the world that we don't
> believe in keeping issues under embargo for very long periods of time.

Pretty much the way I read it :)

The point I care about is a commitment to getting fixes out quickly,
making clear we're not going to abuse "responsible disclosure" to cover
dragging of feet and deflecting blame.

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 03:31:32PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 02:33:58PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On 29 April 2014 11:09, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> >> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
> >> >> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
> >> >> following:
> >> >> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess
> >> >
> >> > Looks generally OK I guess. I'd drop the 'how to use pgp' section --
> >> > anybody who cares will already know how to send us PGP email.
> >> 
> >> The first paragraph under "How to Contact Us Securely" is fine, the rest
> >> seems redundant for readers familiar with PGP, yet hardly sufficient for
> >> the rest.
> >> 
> >> One thing I like about Libvirt's Security Process page[*] is they give
> >> an idea on embargo duration.
> >
> > FWIW I picked the "2 weeks" length myself a completely arbitrary timeframe.
> > We haven't stuck to that strictly - we consider needs of each vulnerability
> > as it is triaged to determine the minimum practical embargo time. So think
> > of "2 weeks" as more of a guiding principal to show the world that we don't
> > believe in keeping issues under embargo for very long periods of time.
> 
> Pretty much the way I read it :)
> 
> The point I care about is a commitment to getting fixes out quickly,
> making clear we're not going to abuse "responsible disclosure" to cover
> dragging of feet and deflecting blame.

Well it does say right at the top:  "we aim to take immediate action to
address serious security-related problems that involve our product".
I don't see how by myself I can make a more specific commitment.
If multiple maintainers can make a stronger guarantee, we can
document it (it's a wiki :)

It won't be easy to retract a promise once given, so let's tread
carefully here.

-- 
MST

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Stefan Hajnoczi]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 09:56:19AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 29 April 2014 06:51, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > If not too late, I'd like to discuss our security process.
>> > Do we as the project generally agree to use responsible disclosure policy
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_disclosure ?
>>
>> I think something like that makes sense. I'm a bit wary that
>> we write up some complicated policy that we're not then
>> in practice capable of executing given our level of resources.
>> We should certainly write out some documentation though...
>>
>> thanks
>> -- PMM
>
> I didn't have anything complex in mind.
>
> Let's just make clear how to contact us securely, when to contact that
> list, and what we'll do with the info.  I cobbled together the
> following:
> http://wiki.qemu.org/SecurityProcess

Looks good.  Responsible disclosure plus who to contact should be
enough to help people report security issues properly.

Stefan

Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for 2014-04-28

[Alexander Graf]

On 28.04.2014, at 17:34, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:

> Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Please, send any topic that you are interested in covering.
> 
> [...]
> 
> I'd like to have these things settled sooner than five minutes before
> the scheduled hour, so here goes: call or no call?  Agenda?

I don't think we managed to fully conclude on a good way to assign sysbus/platbus devices into the guest using configuration data only, did we? Would be good to put that on today's agenda again and conclude on something, so people who need it can work into the right direction.


Alex