From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 378CEECAAD3 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 19:00:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4MLyX928tyz2yyT for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 05:00:41 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=oXoB6doM; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=jrey@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pp1 header.b=oXoB6doM; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4MLyWP6gCgz2xG4 for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2022 05:00:01 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 285Ik6iD031650; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:59 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=bLmTZkskQkcKRVEnktkevyGTjpj9l/IuEEuqHZNJT38=; b=oXoB6doMz4bPz6kxpir9l104V6a4x2Mgl05/YzetzpMNlGZxiWKb2DcS1yVEMAXSfoHf ta1harRdCw5/f7o/HcDKkxxCCMgy3sXN3T8TjzCZobBhA/hyZGWFIHjbaMFGU3HX3gzP A7/23Hg02YGYcCklNKIpaFIxmS6RN1Yth0LIvCgZodB2O5J9PFNe8PFsoMJESp6D/woO 0OARdFl1Z/cl/BtkenwzrLabvOB7iZCef50xOCt7WKDZJxwSyC4vPXs3BKgxkFYptlPM AfJmdD4fzRkR6Jxnfxn9UawQdAcLbs3G9AsecyCLox1zXvduhmEsBo9hR+6R105k9dPq 6g== Received: from ppma04wdc.us.ibm.com (1a.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.26]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3jdpp9g86y-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 05 Sep 2022 18:59:59 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 285Iq3ax014349; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:58 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.23]) by ppma04wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3jbxj9ejt0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 05 Sep 2022 18:59:58 +0000 Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.110]) by b01cxnp22033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 285IxwI766060712 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:58 GMT Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046DAAE060; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9B04AE05C; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.160.52.140] (unknown [9.160.52.140]) by b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 5 Sep 2022 18:59:57 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <3ffc663e-82d9-1ba8-9a47-9b5876ab2dc7@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2022 13:59:56 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0 Subject: Re: Security Working Group meeting - Wednesday August 31 - results Content-Language: en-US To: Patrick Williams References:

From: Joseph Reynolds In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: BZzHkdxFRws8tFEo4fH0RXMreLUIDucs X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: BZzHkdxFRws8tFEo4fH0RXMreLUIDucs Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.895,Hydra:6.0.528,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-09-05_14,2022-09-05_03,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2207270000 definitions=main-2209050090 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: openbmc Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On 9/1/22 6:27 AM, Patrick Williams wrote: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 01:09:10PM -0500, Joseph Reynolds wrote: > >> 2 Proposal for dynamic changes to Redfish authorization rules >> https://gerrit.openbmc.org/c/openbmc/docs/+/56401 >> >> >> No discussion. > Does "no discussion" mean? > - This topic was not covered. > - Nobody present seemed to have an opinion. > - Everyone present was onboard with it as-is. > > I'm trying to gauge where consensus is at. I use "no discussion" when the topic was introduces and described, but nobody expressed any interest or asked any questions. I think someone asked for the review link, which was already in the agenda. <-- Is there a better way I could say this in the meeting minutes? When an agenda item is skipped or omitted from the meeting, I'll put something like "the following topics were not covered" with the reason why. Joseph