speaking with my HBase hat on instead of my Hadoop hat, when the Hadoop project publishes that there's a CVE but does not include a maintenance release that mitigates it for a given minor release line, we assume that means the Hadoop project is saying that release line is EOM and should be abandoned.
I don't know if that's an accurate interpretation in all cases. With my Hadoop hat on, I think downstream projects should use the interfaces we say are safe to use and those interfaces should not include dependencies where practical. I don't know how often a CVE comes along for things like our logging API dependency, for example. But downstream folks should definitely not rely on dependencies we use for internal service, so I'm surprised that a version change for Jetty would impact downstream. On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 12:33 PM Wei-Chiu Chuang <weic...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi Hadoop developers, > > I've always had this question and I don't know the answer. > > For the last few months I finally spent time to deal with the vulnerability > reports from our internal dependency check tools. > > Say in HADOOP-16152 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16152> > we update Jetty from 9.3.27 to 9.4.20 because of CVE-2019-16869, should I > cherrypick the fix into all lower releases? > This is not a trivial change, and it breaks downstreams like Tez. On the > other hand, it doesn't seem reasonable if I put this fix only in trunk, and > left older releases vulnerable. What's the expectation of downstream > applications w.r.t breaking compatibility vs fixing security issues? > > Thoughts? -- busbey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org
