Any way thanks for the cli API

On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, 08:18 Som Lima, <[email protected]> wrote:

> When you put a url in a browser and hit enter.
>
> IF the url has to travel to a server on the intranet then an algorithm
> ensuring tight coupling will be executed.
>
> IF the url has to travel on the internet to get to a server then a
> completely different algorithm gets executed.
>
> The WAN algorithm relies on CHECKSUM  to ensure data integrity.
> It is weak and prone to easy vulnerability.  At the very minimum the user
> needs to implement encryption (HTTPS).
>
>
> The LAN  algorithm  is quite different,
> there is far more network traffic between two parties to ensure strong
> secure connection.
>
> API developers  and application developers  do not have access to this
> layer. It is transparent.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, 08:03 Romain Manni-Bucau, <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I kind of agree intranet is as secure as the internet (ie a lot of attacks
>> done last years were done on intranets). yes you are in a local vpc not
>> accessible from the outside but it is also where hackers try to enter
>> first
>> since then it is open bar for them.
>> That said it is very common to use http as a quick serving too - thinking
>> to trainings and hacking sessions where a tomcat serves a local m2 for
>> example.
>> I guess this all lead to the fact we need to support HTTP anyway and
>> enable/document how to still use it in the coming version (and not prevent
>> it in a hardcoded fashion).
>> In terms of security it would be left to the user to enable it explicitly
>> -
>> defaults being secured, exactly as the 0-day vulnerability got fixed in
>> all
>> softwares.
>> Sounds more than relevant to me to enable that case while it is not the
>> default.
>>
>> That said, having this kind of toggle pushes to 3.6.4 more than all others
>> by design then, no?
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> <
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> >
>>
>>
>> Le lun. 29 mars 2021 à 08:51, Som Lima <[email protected]> a écrit
>> :
>>
>> > I thought we were talking about computer programming algorithms.
>> >
>> >
>> > Social engineering  is outside the scope of the  discussion on the
>> subject
>> > of the  algorithm devised in the invisible ( to API developers), network
>> > layer implementation.
>> >
>> > The  scope of discussion is that the intranet is a tightly coupled comm
>> > system therefore secure by design.
>> > Imagine a couple holding each other tightly so no intruder, (third
>> party)
>> > can  come in  between and interfere.
>> >
>> >
>> > Meanwhile the internet  (loosely coupled) due to physical limitations
>> could
>> > not be implemented  using the same algorithm.
>> > It was left to users  to work out the security which can be done using
>> > encryption (HTTPS) as one means of security. Other strategies are also
>> > available. Only the CHECKSUM was supplied as means of data integrity by
>> the
>> > network Gods.
>> >
>> > Anybody want to talk about intraprocess (tight coupling) and
>> Interprocess
>> > (loose coupling) ?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 15:39 Markus KARG, <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Nonsense. It is common sense that most criminal acts are spawned from
>> > > within the local network, due to social engineering.
>> > > -Markus
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> > > Von: Som Lima [mailto:[email protected]]
>> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. März 2021 15:06
>> > > An: Maven Developers List
>> > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Next release version: 3.6.4, 3.7.0, 3.8.0 or
>> other
>> > >
>> > > > BTW there should be an option to still use unsecure http as many
>> people
>> > > run http in their LANs.
>> > >
>> > > I could be wrong but I think the intranet is a tightly coupled  comm
>> > system
>> > > therefore it is secure by design.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 13:31 Markus KARG, <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > We should not do any tricks or unexpected behavior but just stick
>> with
>> > > > SemVer.
>> > > > If there is a need for a security fix, it has to be 3.6.4 and BTW
>> there
>> > > > should be an option to still use unsecure http as many people run
>> http
>> > in
>> > > > their LANs.
>> > > > If it contains backwards-compatible features, it has to be 3.7.0.
>> > > > If it breaks backwards-compatibility, it has to be 4.0.0.
>> > > > In no case it can be 3.8.0.
>> > > > If mvnw was proposed for 3.7 but is not here now, then we either
>> have
>> > to
>> > > > wait with 3.7.0, or we have to tell people that we move mvnw to 3.8
>> or
>> > > 4.0.
>> > > > I do not see a need for any discussion at all, as SemVer is pretty
>> > clear
>> > > > about the sole correct answer.
>> > > > -Markus
>> > > >
>> > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> > > > Von: Romain Manni-Bucau [mailto:[email protected]]
>> > > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. März 2021 11:47
>> > > > An: Maven Developers List
>> > > > Betreff: [DISCUSS] Next release version: 3.6.4, 3.7.0, 3.8.0 or
>> other
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi all,
>> > > >
>> > > > Before we reroll the failed 3.8.0 I'd like we discuss openly the
>> next
>> > > > versioning since it seems we didn't reach a consensus yet and
>> trying to
>> > > not
>> > > > create too much friction for users and in the community.
>> > > >
>> > > > As a reminder the only feature the release will get is to prevent
>> HTTP
>> > > repo
>> > > > (in favor of HTTPS ones). In that regard it is a breaking change if
>> > users
>> > > > rely on HTTP repo but a security fix (I don't come back on the HTTP
>> ->
>> > > > HTTPS move IT ecosystem got recently here).
>> > > >
>> > > > So it seems there are multiple versioning options:
>> > > >
>> > > > 1. 3.6.4: seems natural since it is a security fix, enables
>> companies
>> > to
>> > > > get this fix respecting a project versioning policy without having
>> to
>> > > > upgrade and avoids us to have to maintain 3.6 + 3.7/3.8 and soon
>> 4.x.
>> > > > Indeed it requires a very well documented paragraph about this
>> change
>> > and
>> > > > how to workaround it (local proxy/mirror is a trivial one for
>> example)
>> > > but
>> > > > it will be the case whatever version we pick anyway IMHO.
>> > > > 2. 3.7.0: since it is a breaking change it can seem natural too (but
>> > has
>> > > > the pitfall to likely require a backport in 3.6 anyway, due to the
>> > > > versioning policies which can prevent some users to upgrade to a
>> 3.7)
>> > > > 3. 3.8.0: was the vote, seems the rational was that originally we
>> > > > targetting mvnw in 3.7 and since we didn't make it 3.8 was used.
>> Have
>> > to
>> > > > admit I'm not sure of this reasoning more than that (cause for me
>> if we
>> > > > don't have a planned feature we can either try to push/wait for it
>> or
>> > > > postpone it but not skip a version due to that) so if anyone wants
>> to
>> > > > complete the reasoning here it would be great.
>> > > >
>> > > > Indeed my preference is for 3.6.4 which has the most advantages for
>> > > > everyone and no additional drawbacks compared to 3.7 or 3.8 options
>> > until
>> > > > we try to push to get mvnw in which would mean 3.7 becomes more
>> natural
>> > > > (and likely imply a 3.6.x maintenance version).
>> > > >
>> > > > Goal of this thread is to feel the overall trend and see if we can
>> > refine
>> > > > the proposals (for example: can we drop 3.8 one and only keep 3.7
>> and
>> > 3.6
>> > > > or - best - can we refine it to a single version after some
>> exchanges).
>> > > > If we keep a few proposals after some days, what about a vote where
>> the
>> > > > majority wins - we would just need to define how we count,
>> > > > bindings/committers/all (my preference being last one indeed)?
>> > > >
>> > > > Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>> > > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>> > > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
>> > > > https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>> > > > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>> > > > <
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to