Heh...well, if I'm making Frakenrepos I'm probably not all that worried
about adding additional GPG keys :-P

On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 11:07 AM Brent Kimberley <[email protected]>
wrote:

> It was more of an issue prior to the repo_gpgcheck flag - repository
> metadata signing.
>
> Nevertheless, there is always the full-lifecycle argument.
>
>
>
> *From:* Brent Kimberley
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 2, 2019 10:11 AM
> *To:* SCAP Security Guide <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* RE: Gov profiles gone from EL derivatives?
>
>
>
> Agreed
>
>
>
> *From:* Trevor Vaughan [mailto:[email protected]
> <[email protected]>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 2, 2019 10:02 AM
> *To:* SCAP Security Guide <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: Gov profiles gone from EL derivatives?
>
>
>
> Brent,
>
>
>
> You're missing my use case. I don't necessarily own the entire testing
> infrastructure where tests are occurring. We do as much as possible in
> public so that people have an understanding on what's going on under the
> hood.
>
>
>
> Technically, there are a lot of ways to do this but none of them are
> really great and may (or may not) violate the Red Hat licensing agreement
> based on package redistribution.
>
>
>
> I mean, technically, I can just point a RHEL system at the OEL or CentOS
> repos and be done with it, but it doesn't make for a very "correct" test.
>
>
>
> Fundamentally, the system is just behind the times for automated
> infrastructure testing requirements if you want FOSS participation.
>
>
>
> Trevor
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 9:26 AM Brent Kimberley <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >>Trying to do this with RHEL-proper is frustrating at best
>
> Technically, you should be able to create a local RHEL mirror using a
> large hard drive, a fat pipe, an unprivileged user,  and your
> “RHEL-repo-access-pem”.
>
>
>
> *From:* Trevor Vaughan [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 30, 2018 6:05 PM
> *To:* SCAP Security Guide <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: Gov profiles gone from EL derivatives?
>
>
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
>
>
> So, I agree with you all the way up to FIPS. Unfortunately, the tracing
> that we've done on the FIPS 140-2 requirement through various ties to
> policy and FISMA *appears* to be unavailable except by the President of the
> US, by named position. Now, it's possible that this tracing is incorrect
> but I have yet to find anyone that could find another *documented*
> interpretation that overrides the Congressional mandate as handed down to
> NIST and inherited through the 800-53 and CNSS 1253.
>
>
>
> That said, FIPS only applies for the "protection of sensitive
> information". If you don't have any sensitive information (i.e. 100% test
> and eval environment with independent credentials that have no access to
> any other system) then fire away.
>
>
>
> Also, this mandate only applies to organizations directly under the
> Executive and Legislative branches of Government. The Judicial branch can
> do what it likes.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the slight rant, this is one of those particular items that just
> drives me nuts in terms of laws (not policies) that people like to try and
> ignore when it gets inconvenient.
>
>
>
> In terms of packages, I completely agree with Charlie that it's really
> simple to just grab all of the packages through various means so the RHN is
> really just making legitimate use more difficult for systems like yours and
> rapid CI testing systems. We specifically do not use one of the many ways
> of circumventing the process so that we don't run afoul of any licensing
> rules or restrictions.
>
>
>
> Trevor
>
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 12:35 PM Chuck Atkins <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Why use CentOS when RHEL developer subs are free?
>
>
>
> For our environment where we have a small deployment of only 2-4 machines,
> CentOS is much easier to manage off-line on an air-gaped network.
> Mirroring the CentOS repos is pretty easy to do with reposync and monthly
> drops to a web server on the red network.  The CentOS workstations can then
> just point to the yum repos on said webserver and everything works like
> it's supposed to.  Trying to do this with RHEL-proper is frustrating at
> best.  A satellite server is way overkill for a deployment like this and
> setting up the clients for a "normal" yum repo requires removing and
> uninstalling all of the subscription / rhn packages.  There's also the
> simplicity of only have 2 system repos to worry about to get everything
> available in CentOS (Base + Updates) vs dealing with the dozens of channels
> needed in a RHEL subscription to get the same set of available packages.  I
> certainly get the value in all of the various options for managing large
> enterprise deployments but CentOS is just much simpler to deal with for us
> in a small deployment and software-developer-centric environment.  We end
> up using both RHEL and CentOS for different use cases but need to apply the
> same security framework and settings to both.
>
>
>
> With regards to allowed security configurations, as a contractor we've
> never had issues with DSS and CentOS being allowed so long as we apply all
> the appropriate RHEL rules and can appropriately justify where we diverge.
> The only ones I've run into that end up not applicable across the two have
> been FIPS related, which we have to disable anyways to accommodate third
> party unsigned kernel modules for the Nvidia driver.  The STIGs after all
> are just a guideline and place to start from so you can adapt it to your
> own environment with appropriate tailoring and justification, not a fixed
> "it has to be this way".  Most of the government entities we work with (DoD
> and DoE) use RHEL for their infrastructure servers and end-user
> workstations but CentOS for their projects and developer environments.
> Many of the DoE labs we work with even use CentOS on their large scale HPC
> deployments (LANL, Sandia, LLNL, etc.) while others use RHEL proper.
>
>
>
> - Chuck
>
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list --
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Trevor Vaughan
> Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
>
> (410) 541-6699 x788
>
>
> -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
>
> THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) ONLY AND MAY
> CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY, CONFIDENTIAL, AND/OR
> EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER ANY RELEVANT PRIVACY LEGISLATION. No rights to
> any privilege have been waived. If you are not the intended recipient, you
> are hereby notified that any review, re-transmission, dissemination,
> distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy, taking of action in
> reliance on or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error,
> please notify me by return e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this
> message.
>
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list --
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]
>
>
>
> --
>
> Trevor Vaughan
> Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
>
> (410) 541-6699 x788
>
>
> -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
> THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) ONLY AND MAY
> CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY, CONFIDENTIAL, AND/OR
> EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER ANY RELEVANT PRIVACY LEGISLATION. No rights to
> any privilege have been waived. If you are not the intended recipient, you
> are hereby notified that any review, re-transmission, dissemination,
> distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy, taking of action in
> reliance on or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error,
> please notify me by return e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this
> message.
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list --
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]
>


-- 
Trevor Vaughan
Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc
(410) 541-6699 x788

-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]

Reply via email to