There are two things: having a separate git repo (or not), and having it
part of the project or 3rd party. We can have multiple git repos on
apache.org.

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 17:13 Mingshen Sun <[email protected]> wrote:

> Pei, I think Matt’s point is on the situation if you want to separate this
> project as an individual project.
>
> So, for this tool, I think the question is whether to put it in the
> `apache/incubator-mesatee` repo  or a new `apache/incubator-mesatee-xxx`
> repo.
>
> Does this explanation clear to you?
>
> > On Dec 4, 2019, at 2:57 PM, Wang Pei <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Matt,
> >
> > Thanks for the thoughtful comments.
> >
> > There shouldn't be any problem with licensing. Regarding your other
> > concerns, I have some more information. It's a very tiny tool (about 1300
> > lines of Rust). It provides very limited functionality, and only works
> with
> > a particular version of the Rust compiler (the exact version specified by
> > Teaclave and its dependencies). In this sense, releasing it as a separate
> > tool seems a bit overkill. Indeed, it's a bit isolated in terms of
> > development since it's a rustc plugin rather than anything directly
> related
> > to Teaclave. However, I don't think we will need to actively develop it
> as
> > we do for the rest part of Teaclave. There is no plan to expand its
> > functionality, although it does need maintenance because every time
> > Teaclave updates its toolchain version the internal APIs of rustc change.
> >
> > With all that said, I do see a point in making the tool as a separate
> > project. More discussions are welcome!
> >
> > Pei
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 1:46 PM Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Whether you'd like to make this part of the project here or externally
> >> really depends on a few things:
> >>
> >> * Licensing: if it's Apache licensed, then not an issue.
> >> * Community: if it's a tool being developed by only one of the
> >> committers, then it's fairly difficult for the rest of the community
> >> to vote on releases for it.
> >> * Releases: is it released on its own cycle from other repos? If so,
> >> note what I mentioned about community which can cause releases to get
> >> delayed waiting for enough votes.
> >>
> >> I suspect this component is appropriate to put here. Whether we'd like
> >> it in its own git repo or not is another question.
> >>
> >> On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 14:08, Wang Pei <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> One of the features MesaTEE (now renamed as Teaclave) promised when it
> >> was
> >>> initially open-sourced is the so-called "Non-bypassable gateway."
> >>> Basically, we would like to show that all interactions between the TEE
> >> and
> >>> the untrusted outside world are properly sanitized in our
> implementation.
> >>>
> >>> As a first step towards this goal, I have implemented a tool that can
> >>> extract the dependency graph of the crates built by Cargo. It's
> >>> instrumentation to rustc that analyzes the Rust IR and stores
> information
> >>> with an embedded DB such that it can gather information collected by
> >>> multiple rustc invocations.
> >>>
> >>> The tool provides three custom attributes: require_audit, audited, and
> >>> entry_point. These attributes can annotate any item-like entities in
> Rust
> >>> code, including ADT, functions, traits, and impl blocks. Starting from
> >> each
> >>> entry_point, the tool traverses the dependency graph with DFS and
> emits a
> >>> warning whenever it encounters an item marked by require_audit unless
> >>> another item marked by audited presents along the traversal path.
> >>>
> >>> The attributes have no effects on code generation and can be safely
> >> ignored
> >>> by anyone that does not care about code auditing.
> >>>
> >>> About how to publish the tool, there are two options. It can be part of
> >>> mesatee-sgx, the fundamental dependency of the mesatee project. Or it
> can
> >>> be released as a standalone tool. In theory, it can be used to audit
> >> other
> >>> Rust projects, but I wonder how attractive that would be. Either way,
> we
> >>> have to annotate a lot of code in mesatee-sgx and mesatee to make the
> >> tool
> >>> acutally useful.
> >>>
> >>> Let me know your thoughts.
> >>>
> >>> Pei
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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]
>
> --
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to