I can definitely add JIRA issues and share the findings.

I’ll start with version 3.6.2.  Could take a couple of days to get this going 
in Ironbank but I’ll keep you updated.

Jim

> On Feb 22, 2023, at 11:23 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> ok - thanks for clarifying. i hope you'll feel free to issue PRs/JIRAs and
> just generally interact with the community to help us get TinkerPop
> IronBank-ready. it would be nice if you kept us apprised of releases that
> were accepted there. i assume we could add a link somewhere to the place
> TinkerPop is hosted in ironbank if there is such a direct link publicly
> available and you could share it?
> 
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 11:59 AM Jim Foscue <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> What you're saying makes sense to me.  We can be the custodians of the
>> Ironbank process/image since we have access.
>> 
>> I'm not sure I understand your release process.  The ironbank build pulls
>> in the files from https://dlcdn.apache.org/tinkerpop/.
>> 
>> For example
>> # List of resources to make available to the offline build context
>> resources:
>> - url: "
>> 
>> https://dlcdn.apache.org/tinkerpop/3.6.1/apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-server-3.6.1-bin.zip
>> "
>>  filename: "apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-server-3.6.1-bin.zip"
>>  validation:
>>    type: sha512
>>    value:
>> 
>> 4930e79caeed0ea019bf52da9d78d3440a0e6805b3232763b774116c10e7ee38dbe5ac9bb3873acf318c65349d00b204d7ec89c60324eda9a4aaaa2c2998053b
>> - url: "
>> 
>> https://dlcdn.apache.org/tinkerpop/3.6.1/apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-3.6.1-bin.zip
>> "
>>  filename: "apache-tinkerpop-gremlin-console-3.6.1-bin.zip"
>>  validation:
>>    type: sha512
>>    value:
>> 
>> 3516b601298427e78580665016f6d29bf5ad39bfeeafe9e4cd762bb7a9454d844e131df4935b4fa61fb2f9d749eb5f2fa4b56df2908a8067825a203423b958c5
>> 
>> So when do these get updated? Is it when there is a new release or bug
>> fixes? Whenever these are updated is when we would get the fixes.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> Jim
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:15 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Unless I'm not understanding something there isn't much change to process
>>> for TinkerPop. You spot a problem in IronBank and either submit a PR to
>> fix
>>> or create a JIRA for someone else to fix if you don't have the ability to
>>> do it yourself. It gets merged and presumably you can get your image into
>>> IronBank.
>>> 
>>> What I don't understand is how you consume that fix. Let's say IronBank
>> had
>>> a problem in 3.6.2. TinkerPop fixes it. Now what? Do you have to wait
>> until
>>> we release 3.6.3 to get that into IronBank and hope you don't hit more
>>> problems? Is there a way to test an image ahead of a TinkerPop release? I
>>> guess I'm trying to confirm that there really isn't any change to
>> anything
>>> TinkerPop does in the normal process of reviewing pull request and fixing
>>> security problems because it seems pretty normal/simple otherwise. No one
>>> at TinkerPop can release anything to IronBank so this is purely a
>>> third-party maintained convenience which you are handling for the wider
>>> community. Is that a fair depiction of what were looking at here?
>>> 
>>> So, if there's nothing out of the ordinary to do from TinkerPop's side
>> then
>>> I guess you should feel free to let the PRs/JIRAs fly (or maybe just call
>>> attention to existing ones if dependabot is already on it). Perhaps you
>>> should ensure you comment on these that they are "IronBank" related so
>> that
>>> they perhaps get some visibility that way.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 9:48 AM Jim Foscue <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I would like to bring this discussion back up.
>>>> 
>>>> Has anyone given this any more thought?  My team is willing to help but
>>> we
>>>> have not participated in the development of any of tinkerpop so it
>> would
>>> be
>>>> a huge effort on our part to get involved in the development.  We are
>>>> developers but not our main language is C#.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Jim Foscue
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 5:40 AM Stephen Mallette <[email protected]
>>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> From what I'm gathering, this doesn't sound as if it changes much of
>>> how
>>>>> things operate here or the release process. It sounds as though Jim
>>>> simply
>>>>> needs to submit dependency related PRs to TinkerPop. They would be
>>>> reviewed
>>>>> and merged in similar fashion to any PR that arrived. As these would
>> be
>>>>> security related PRs, they probably wouldn't generate
>>> objections/concerns
>>>>> and would merge quickly.
>>>>> 
>>>>> There is still something I don't quite understand. 3.6.1 scanned by
>>>>> IronBank shows problems. Jim submits PRs to TinkerPop to fix those
>>>> issues.
>>>>> What version ultimately lands in IronBank? IronBank has to wait for a
>>>> 3.6.2
>>>>> as 3.6.1 can't pass their scanners? Can IronBank scanners work from
>>>>> SNAPSHOT? Ideally, IronBank would be working on 3.6.2-SNAPSHOT right
>>> now
>>>> as
>>>>> release is arriving within the next few weeks. Then you could have a
>>>> clean,
>>>>> pre-tested artifact in 3.6.2 to push into IronBank when it releases.
>>> This
>>>>> way IronBank would align with DockerHub and the rest of the release.
>>>>> Putting some kind of patched version of 3.6.1 in IronBank seems like
>> it
>>>>> could cause confusion imo.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 12:51 PM Jim Foscue <
>>> [email protected]
>>>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I believe most of the critical/high vulnerabilities are a result of
>>>>>> outdated dependencies.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Another thing to consider is that to participate as an active
>>> developer
>>>>> on
>>>>>> Ironbank the user must have a DoD CAC which allows them access to
>> the
>>>>>> Ironbank repository and the vulnerabilities.  I'm not sure if
>> anyone
>>>> here
>>>>>> has one but I do.  I was able to get the process started with the
>>> 3.6.1
>>>>>> version and there are a number of critical and highs.  Some of the
>>>>> examples
>>>>>> are:
>>>>>> Apache Shiro before 1.5.3, when using Apache Shiro with Spring
>>> dynamic
>>>>>> controllers, a specially crafted request may cause an
>> authentication
>>>>>> bypass.
>>>>>> Neo4j through 3.4.18 (with the shell server enabled) exposes an RMI
>>>>> service
>>>>>> that arbitrarily deserializes Java objects, e.g., through
>>>>>> setSessionVariable. An attacker can abuse this for remote code
>>>> execution
>>>>>> because there are dependencies with exploitable gadget chains.
>>>>>> HttpObjectDecoder.java in Netty before 4.1.44 allows a
>> Content-Length
>>>>>> header to be accompanied by a second Content-Length header, or by a
>>>>>> Transfer-Encoding header.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Looks like the Apache Shiro library is one of the problem spots.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I do agree with your assessment that including a scanner in the
>>> normal
>>>>>> build process would help a lot.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 3:08 AM Florian Hockmann <
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It would be good to know what kind of vulnerabilities Ironbank
>> can
>>>>> find.
>>>>>>> Most of such scanners I know simply use a database of known
>>>>>> vulnerabilities
>>>>>>> that include the libraries and their versions that are affected.
>>> The
>>>>>>> Log4Shell vulnerability from last year is a good example that
>> could
>>>> be
>>>>>>> found by such a scanner.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In general I think that we should ideally try to include such a
>>>> scanner
>>>>>>> into our usual dev process so we can find those vulnerabilities
>>> early
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> then fix them. Fixing them will probably most of the time just
>> mean
>>>>>>> updating a dependency.
>>>>>>> If we just add Ironbank as an additional release channel behind
>> our
>>>>> usual
>>>>>>> release process, then we just get notified about vulnerabilities
>>>> after
>>>>> we
>>>>>>> just have released a version with these vulnerabilities. I think
>>> that
>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> only lead to additional pain for us as we would have to fix them
>>> and
>>>>> then
>>>>>>> start another release process to perform a release without the
>>>>>>> vulnerability.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> GitHub already offers such a vulnerability scanner that works
>>>> together
>>>>>>> with Dependabot. This means that Dependabot will create a PR to
>>>> update
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> dependency if that contains a known vulnerability. These security
>>>>> related
>>>>>>> PRs will be marked as such, but in a way that is only visible to
>>>>>>> maintainers of the repo. So, we can prioritize these security
>>> related
>>>>> PRs
>>>>>>> over the usual Dependabot PRs that sometimes overwhelm us due to
>>> the
>>>>> high
>>>>>>> number of dependencies we have.
>>>>>>> This improves the security of TinkerPop in general and I think
>> that
>>>> it
>>>>>>> also improves our dev process as we currently get tickets for
>> such
>>>>>> security
>>>>>>> problems manually created by users who probably already execute
>>> such
>>>>>>> scanners on our JARs / Docker images (two recent examples:
>>>>>>> TINKERPOP-2843[1] and TINKERPOP-2826[2]) and then they are
>> usually
>>>> also
>>>>>>> addressed by someone who manually updates the dependency.
>>>>>>> If the Ironbank scanner works in a similar way, then this would
>>> also
>>>>> make
>>>>>>> it a lot easier to publish our images to the Ironbank registry as
>>>> that
>>>>>>> should ideally not uncover any new vulnerabilities since they
>> have
>>>>>> already
>>>>>>> been found and fixed by our own process (like GitHub security
>>>> scanning
>>>>> +
>>>>>>> Dependabot).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> By the way, I think this is the documentation of Ironbank:
>>>>>>> https://p1.dso.mil/products/iron-bank
>>>>>>> And here is a list of available Docker images:
>>>>>> https://repo1.dso.mil/dsop
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, the repos seem to be private so we can't see much,
>>> but
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> list at least gives an idea of what kind of projects are already
>>>>>> available
>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2843
>>>>>>> [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-2826
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>>>>>> Von: Jim Foscue <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Gesendet: Montag, 19. Dezember 2022 17:10
>>>>>>> An: [email protected]
>>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes, Ironbank is an approved DoD dockerhub.  There is no
>>> requirement
>>>>> for
>>>>>>> the releases on Ironbank to be in sync with the releases in
>>>>>>> Apache/Tinkerpop.  The major requirement for Ironbank is for
>> there
>>>> not
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> be any critical/high vulnerabilities in the docker image.  If
>> there
>>>> are
>>>>>>> vulnerabilities that "pop" up they should be addressed quickly.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My team can help with that process but it would be hard for us to
>>> fix
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> vulnerabilities without knowing the code.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 5:36 AM Stephen Mallette <
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi Jim, thanks for bringing this discussion here.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Generally speaking, it sounds like a reasonable idea to open
>>>>> TinkerPop
>>>>>>>> opportunities to the DoD environment. Would it be fair to call
>>>>>>>> IronBank a DoD approved DockerHub? Would the idea be that
>>> TinkerPop
>>>>>>>> would release to IronBank in the same cadence as is done with
>> the
>>>>>>>> standard release schedule that publishes to DockerHub?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If so, I think a concern would be that supporting IronBank
>>> creates
>>>> a
>>>>>>>> hurdle to releasing that may be high and thus delay releases
>> that
>>>>>>>> might otherwise be acceptable outside of that space. I don't
>> know
>>>> if
>>>>>>>> it makes sense, but perhaps releasing to IronBank should be
>>>> decoupled
>>>>>>> from standard releases?
>>>>>>>> Like 3.5.5 would go out the door and then a separate process
>>> would
>>>> go
>>>>>>>> under way to harden 3.5.5 to meet IronBank needs? Of course,
>> then
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> 3.5.5 in IronBank isn't necessarily the 3.5.5 in DockerHub so
>>> that
>>>>>>>> could be problematic. Do you happen to know how other major
>> open
>>>>>>>> source projects do this?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 4:51 PM Jim Foscue
>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ironbank discussion
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I would like to suggest making tinkerpop/gremlin available on
>>> the
>>>>>>>>> DoD Ironbank docker registry (https://ironbank.dso.mil).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Ironbank is a DoD docker registry that maintains publicly
>>>> available
>>>>>>>> docker
>>>>>>>>> container images that have been "hardened' and given the ok
>> to
>>>> use
>>>>>>>>> on DoD contracts.  The process of hardening an image involves
>>>>>>>>> running the docker container image through a vulnerability
>>>> scanning
>>>>>>>>> process.  Any critical
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> high vulnerabilities have to be addressed before getting the
>>>> docker
>>>>>>>>> container image approved for DoD use.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> My team has been using the publicly available tinkerpop/graph
>>> on
>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> DoD contract that is a prototype.  But to continue using it
>> in
>>> a
>>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> official
>>>>>>>>> process we have to have it approved by Ironbank.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Therefore,  I am trying to get the tinkerpop developer
>>> community
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> get onboard to push this to Ironbank so that we and other DoD
>>>>>>>>> contracts can
>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> We have access to the Ironbank system (which requires a US
>>>>>>>>> government
>>>>>>>> CAC)
>>>>>>>>> and are willing to help guide the process.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please consider this request and provide any feedback to me
>> at
>>>> your
>>>>>>>>> convience.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Jim Foscue
>>>>>>>>> JDM Solutions
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> *Jim Foscue*, Software Engineer
>>>>>>>>> *JDM Solutions*
>>>>>>>>> 256.694.9387
>>>>>>>>> [email protected] <
>> [email protected]
>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> *This e-mail and any attachements are for the intended
>>>> recipient(s)
>>>>>>>>> only and may contain information proprietary or private to
>> JDM
>>>>>>> Solutions, LLC.
>>>>>>>>> If you are not the intended recipient **please delete without
>>>>>>>>> copying and kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake
>>> in
>>>>>>>>> delivery.  This
>>>>>>>> email
>>>>>>>>> may be personal in communication from the sender and as such
>>> does
>>>>>>>>> not represent the views of the company.*
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> *This e-mail and any attachements are for the intended
>> recipient(s)
>>>>> only
>>>>>>> and may contain information proprietary or private to JDM
>>> Solutions,
>>>>> LLC.
>>>>>>> If you are not the intended recipient **please delete without
>>> copying
>>>>> and
>>>>>>> kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.
>>> This
>>>>>> email
>>>>>>> may be personal in communication from the sender and as such does
>>> not
>>>>>>> represent the views of the company.*
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *This e-mail and any attachements are for the intended recipient(s)
>>>> only
>>>>>> and may contain information proprietary or private to JDM
>> Solutions,
>>>> LLC.
>>>>>> If you are not the intended recipient **please delete without
>> copying
>>>> and
>>>>>> kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.
>> This
>>>>> email
>>>>>> may be personal in communication from the sender and as such does
>> not
>>>>>> represent the views of the company.*
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> *This e-mail and any attachments are for the intended recipient(s) only
>>>> and
>>>> may contain information proprietary or private to JDM Solutions, LLC.
>> If
>>>> you are not the intended recipient **please delete without copying and
>>>> kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.  This
>>> email
>>>> may be personal in communication from the sender and as such does not
>>>> represent the views of the company.*
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *This e-mail and any attachments are for the intended recipient(s) only
>> and
>> may contain information proprietary or private to JDM Solutions, LLC.  If
>> you are not the intended recipient **please delete without copying and
>> kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.  This email
>> may be personal in communication from the sender and as such does not
>> represent the views of the company.*
>> 

-- 
*This e-mail and any attachments are for the intended recipient(s) only and 
may contain information proprietary or private to JDM Solutions, LLC.  If 
you are not the intended recipient **please delete without copying and 
kindly advise the sender by e-mail of the mistake in delivery.  This email 
may be personal in communication from the sender and as such does not 
represent the views of the company.*

Reply via email to