Hi,

Note this thread spans both dev@ (a public list) and private@ (a private
list). We usually try not to do that, to avoid accidentally leaking
information from the private to the public sphere (see also for example
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/committer.html). For this
particular thread I suppose that risk is not so big, but let's be careful
especially when discussing security impact. More comments inline:

On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 1:56 AM Jinwoo Hwang <[email protected]> wrote:

> As it stands, the policy requires *three binding +1 votes* from PMC members
> to finalize a release. While this standard has served us well historically,
> it may no longer reflect the current reality of our project’s active
> participation. In 2023, it was noted that although the PMC officially lists
> 31 members, fewer than 10 were actively engaged. As Leon recently pointed
> out, based on current email activity, it appears that *only three PMC
> members* are actively participating—suggesting that the actual number of
> engaged PMC members may now be just three.
>
> This makes reaching quorum increasingly difficult—even when the broader
> community is contributing actively and consistently. The current release
> effort, which includes over 20 commits and four release candidates, is a
> clear example of this challenge. Despite strong momentum, we are at risk of
> stalling due to procedural thresholds that no longer match our operational
> scale.
>

I'd like to note that my understanding is that the 'voting window' is a 'no
closing the vote before', but not a 'the vote must close at' - so even if
the vote would be delayed that is not necessarily a dealbreaker. I agree
it's better for momentum if the vote can close quickly, of course ;) .


> More importantly, this release remediates *critical security
> vulnerabilities* that directly impact the reliability and safety of Apache
> Geode deployments. These include:
>
>    - *CVE-2023-40167*: Request smuggling via '+' in Content-Length
>    - *CVE-2023-22602*: Spring Boot pattern mismatch auth bypass
>    - *CVE-2023-34478*: Path traversal routing bypass
>    - *CVE-2023-46750*: Form auth open redirect
>    - *CVE-2024-8184*: DoS via memory exhaustion
>    - *CVE-2024-13009*: Gzip buffer mismanagement causing cross-request data
>    leakage
>    - *CVE-2023-26049*: Cookie smuggling
>    - *CVE-2023-26048*: Multipart request DoS
>    - *CVE-2022-42004 & CVE-2022-42003*: Deep nested array DoS
>    vulnerabilities
>    - *CVE-2020-36518*: Stack overflow vulnerability
>    - *CVE-2022-40664*: Authentication bypass via RequestDispatcher
>    - *CVE-2022-32532*: RegexRequestMatcher misconfiguration
>    - *CVE-2023-46749*: Path traversal leading to auth bypass
>    - *CVE-2024-36124*: JVM crash risk enabling DoS
>    - *CVE-2025-48734*: Improper access control via Java enum ClassLoader
>    exposure
>
> Delaying this release not only risks losing community momentum—it also
> prolongs exposure to known vulnerabilities that have already been
> addressed.
>

While I agree these advisories for dependencies represent some risk, I want
to note that AFAIK none of those have been confirmed to actually impact
Geode. A release may also fix undisclosed vulnerabilities, but frankly
given the previous release AFAICS was in 2022 it's hard to argue particular
urgency. Still, I'm thrilled the release is proceeding!


> Given this, I propose we revisit the voting threshold to better reflect the
> actual number of active PMC members. If the original intent of requiring
> three votes was to represent roughly 10% of the full PMC, then applying
> that same ratio to the currently active group would suggest a threshold of
> *one
> binding vote*.
>
> This adjustment would:
>
>    - Align our process with the current scale of active participation
>    - Prevent valuable contributions and security fixes from being blocked
>    due to quorum issues
>    - Encourage continued engagement by reducing procedural bottlenecks
>
> I recognize this is a significant change and welcome discussion on how best
> to approach it—whether through a formal vote, a temporary adjustment, or a
> broader review of our governance practices.
>
> Thank you for your continued dedication to Apache Geode. I look forward to
> hearing your thoughts.


The '3 votes' threshold comes from the Apache Release Policy (
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html). If a project has
insufficient active PMC members to make that quorum, it should consider
retiring. Indeed Geode has been at the brink of retirement, but I agree it
is now on a good trajectory back to health. I think Leon's assessment of
the number of active PMCs may be a bit pessimistic, as I've seen a few
other PMC members be active as well (though that may have been on the
private list, I haven't checked).

Instead of dropping the threshold, I'm optimistic we can use the current
momentum both to encourage existing PMC members to become/remain active,
but also to work towards onboarding new PMC members.


Kind regards,

Arnout


> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 6:22 PM Jinwoo Hwang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Dear Apache Geode PMC Members,
> >
> > We are standing at the edge of a major milestone—and we need your help to
> > cross it.
> >
> > As of the original deadline, we are still two binding votes short of
> > finalizing the release.
> > In recognition of the tremendous effort poured into this by our
> > contributors and reviewers, we are extending the vote by 24 hours.
> >
> > This release is the result of months of focused collaboration:
> >
> >    - 20+ commits
> >    - 4 release candidates
> >    - Countless hours of testing, reviewing, and refining
> >
> >
> > To let this moment pass without action would be to set aside the hard
> work
> > of those who have reignited momentum in our community.
> > We owe it to them—and to the future of Apache Geode—to see this through.
> >
> > If you are a PMC member who has not yet voted, I urge you to take a
> moment
> > and cast your vote.
> > Your participation is not just procedural—it is a statement of support
> for
> > the community, for the contributors, and for the continued vitality of
> this
> > project.
> >
> > Let’s not allow this opportunity to stall. Let’s finish what we
> > started—together.
> > If you have any questions or concerns, I’m available and happy to assist.
> >
> > With respect and appreciation,
> >
> > Jinwoo Hwang (he/him/his)
> >
> > SAS® Research and Development
> > http://JinwooHwang.com
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Jinwoo Hwang <[email protected]>
> > Date: Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 7:55 AM
> > Subject: Project Management Committee Support Needed Today – Help
> Finalize
> > the Apache Geode Release
> > To: <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> > Dear Apache Geode Community and PMC members,
> >
> >
> > It has been nearly three years since our last release on October 10,
> 2022,
> > and we are pleased to share that we are now on the verge of delivering a
> > long-awaited update. Over the past five months, we’ve made more than 20
> > commits and produced four release candidates—a remarkable achievement
> that
> > reflects the renewed energy within our community.
> >
> > This progress would not have been possible without the dedication of many
> > contributors and reviewers. We would like to extend our sincere
> > appreciation to Arnout, Bryan, Calvin, Charlie, Kirk, Kishor, Leon, and
> > Niall for your generous support and active engagement. Your efforts have
> > been instrumental in reigniting momentum and moving the project forward.
> >
> > As of this morning, we are just two PMC votes away from finalizing the
> > release. If you are a PMC member and have not yet voted, please consider
> > doing so by 3 PM PST today. Your participation is essential to completing
> > this milestone.
> >
> > More importantly, we kindly ask our PMC members to help maintain—and
> > ideally accelerate—the momentum that the community has just rekindled.
> This
> > is a pivotal moment for Apache Geode. While we’ve faced challenges due to
> > limited active committers and documentation that has struggled to keep
> pace
> > with evolving tooling and workflows, your renewed involvement can be a
> > turning point. Active PMC engagement will not only help us close this
> > release but also strengthen the foundation for future contributions and
> > collaboration.
> >
> > Please feel free to reach out to me if you have any concerns or feedback.
> > I’d be happy to discuss and support in any way I can.
> >
> > Let’s take this final step together and build on the collective effort
> > that has brought us here.
> >
> > With appreciation and respect,
> > Jinwoo Hwang (he/him/his)
> >
> >
> > SAS® Research and Development
> > http://JinwooHwang.com
> >
>


-- 
Arnout Engelen
ASF Security Response
Apache Pekko PMC member, ASF Member
NixOS Committer
Independent Open Source consultant

Reply via email to