[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
Hi, FYI I'm unsubscribing ubuntu-archive from this as it seems there is nothing for us to do here anymore, the focal-proposed package has the proper component and release from -proposed to -updates (if that ever happens) is the purview of the SRU team. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
** Tags added: sec-754 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
I've uploaded https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/1.3.3-1ubuntu1 to contain a debian/watch file and run the unit-tests/self-tests as an autopkgtest, too. Also, I've send those suggestions to the Debian maintainer: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1004962 So I think this is just pending on security-review now. ** Bug watch added: Debian Bug tracker #1004962 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1004962 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
Review for Package: protobuf-c [Summary] MIR team ACK under the constraint to resolve the below listed required TODOs and as much as possible having a look at the recommended TODOs. This does need a security review, so I'll assign ubuntu-security List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: protobuf-c-compiler Specific binary packages built, but NOT to be promoted to main: libprotobuf-c1 (at least not needed for the current case, but should be ok to promote if needed later) Notes: - Needed in fwupd due to https://github.com/fwupd/fwupd/pull/3609 Required TODOs: - please add a debian/watch file to help auto-detecting new versions Recommended TODOs: - consider adding an autopkgtest, at least running the self-tests in autopkgtest or better some use case using the lib/compiler - have a look at the compiler warnings if we could help upstream to fix those [Duplication] This is rather interesting in this case, as there are many users and implementations of protobuf in general. The "main" src:protobuf is the core project and provides c++, python, ruby, java, ... bindings. https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers But no "C" in that, so protobuf-c exists. But TBH also several other projects. Of the 6 listed by upstream: https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/master/docs/third_party.md Only two are packaged upb and protobuf-c, both in universe. Also - as outlined in the report - formerly protobuf-c was in main. So there is similarity, but no duplication problem here. [Dependencies] OK: - no other Dependencies to MIR due to this Problems: None [Embedded sources and static linking] OK: - no embedded source present - no static linking - does not have odd Built-Using entries - not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard Problems: None [Security] OK: - history of CVEs does not look concerning - does not run a daemon as root - does not use webkit1,2 - does not use lib*v8 directly - does not open a port/socket - does not process arbitrary web content - does not use centralized online accounts - does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop - does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc) - does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures) Problems: - does parse data formats Depending on where it is used that could be from external sources. Also the current reason for the MIR is the use to update firmware which usually runs with high privilege, so being able to inject some protobuf data on the download could then - if it breaks in the handling - cause quite some issues. I think a security review is needed here. Also confirmed by the fact that the more common lib "protobuf" also had a bunch of CVEs in the past. [Common blockers] OK: - does not FTBFS currently - does have a test suite that runs at build time - test suite fails will fail the build upon error. - if special HW does prevent build/autopkgtest is there a test plan, code, log provided? - if a non-trivial test on this level does not make sense (the lib alone is only doing rather simple things), is the overall solution (app+libs) extensively covered i.e. via end to end autopkgtest ? - no new python2 dependency Problems: - does not have a non-trivial test suite that runs as autopkgtest [Packaging red flags] OK: - Ubuntu does not carry a delta - symbols tracking is in place - Upstream update history is slow but ok - Debian/Ubuntu update history is as slow as upstream - the current release is packaged - promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far maintained the package - no massive Lintian warnings - d/rules is rather clean - It is not on the lto-disabled list Problems: - d/watch is present and looks ok (if needed, e.g. non-native) [Upstream red flags] RULE: flag common issues: RULE: - if you see anything else odd, speak up and ask for clarification OK: - no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it) - no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside tests) - no use of user nobody - no use of setuid - no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu - no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-* - not part of the UI for extra checks - no translation present, but none needed for this case (user visible)? Problems: None - Errors/warnings during the build - nothing severe, but there are some -Wdeclaration-after-statement and -Wc99-c11-compat which we all know are informational now, but could be a problem later on. ** Changed in: protobuf-c (Ubuntu) Assignee: Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) => Ubuntu Security Team (ubuntu-security) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
** Changed in: protobuf-c (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Christian Ehrhardt (paelzer) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
Thank you for updating the MIR content. Foundations agreed to take ownership of this package in our weekly #ubuntu-meeting and signed up as a team subscriber. The outstanding issues are still to be done. ** Tags added: fr-1990 ** Tags removed: rls-jj-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
** Tags added: rls-jj-incoming -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
@Christian, I've written the MIR content to help moving things forward but the owning team should probably be foundation since it's a requirement from fwupd that they own. From the MIR perspective those items need work - the package doesn't include autopkgtests - there is no debian/watch - there are some lintian warnings ** Changed in: protobuf-c (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => New ** Description changed: - The latest 1.7.x version of fwupd can use protobuf-c for supporting the - flashing of Logitech devices that use logitech_bulkcontroller such as - their 4k webcams. + [Availability] + The package protobuf-c is already in Ubuntu universe, and was in main some years ago. + The package protobuf-c builds for the architectures it is designed to work on. + It currently builds and works for architectures: amd64 arm64 armhf i386 ppc64el riscv64 s390x + Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c - This support has been disabled in Ubuntu since protobuf-c is not in main though. - * See https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fwupd/1.7.1-1ubuntu3 + [Rationale] + - The package protobuf-c is required in Ubuntu main for fwupd 1.7.x to handle firmware updates for Logitech devices that use logitech_bulkcontroller such as their 4k webcams. + - The feature is only going to be useful to users owning such hardware but it is important for those users. - protobuf-c used to be in main (see bug - https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/801735) but - got downgraded to universe at some point. Can we restore it to main? + [Security] + - No CVEs/security issues in this software in the past + + - no `suid` or `sgid` binaries + - no executables in `/sbin` and `/usr/sbin` + - Package does not install services, timers or recurring jobs + - Packages does not open privileged ports (ports < 1024) + - Packages does not contain extensions to security-sensitive software + + [Quality assurance - function/usage] + - The package works well right after install + + [Quality assurance - maintenance] + - The package is maintained well in Debian/Ubuntu and has no bugs open in Debian or Ubuntu + - Ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug + - Debian https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=protobuf-c + - The package does not deal with exotic hardware we cannot support + + [Quality assurance - testing] + - The package runs a test suite on build time, if it fails + it makes the build fail, link to build log https://launchpadlibrarian.net/464904971/buildlog_ubuntu-focal-amd64.protobuf-c_1.3.3-1_BUILDING.txt.gz + + - The package does not run an autopkgtest but there is no reason they + shouldn't be added. + + [Quality assurance - packaging] + - debian/watch is not present, no reason it shouldn't have one though + + - This package has some minor lintian warnings + + # lintian --pedantic + running with root privileges is not recommended! + W: protobuf-c-compiler: no-manual-page usr/bin/protoc-c + W: protobuf-c-compiler: no-manual-page usr/bin/protoc-gen-c + P: protobuf-c source: package-uses-old-debhelper-compat-version 12 + P: protobuf-c source: silent-on-rules-requiring-root + P: protobuf-c source: update-debian-copyright 2019 vs 2020 [debian/copyright:65] + + and some warnings about long lines in upstream sources + + - Lintian overrides are not present + + - This package does not rely on obsolete or about to be demoted packages. + - This package has no python2 or GTK2 dependencies + + - The package will be installed by default, but does not ask debconf + questions + + - Packaging and build is easy, link to d/rules + https://salsa.debian.org/edmonds/protobuf-c/-/blob/master/debian/rules + + [UI standards] + - Application is not end-user facing (does not need translation) + + [Dependencies] + - No further depends or recommends dependencies that are not yet in main + + [Standards compliance] + - This package correctly follows FHS and Debian Policy + + [Maintenance/Owner] + - Owning Team should be foundations since they own fwupd + - Team is not yet, but will subscribe to the package before promotion + + - This does not use static builds + - This does not use vendored code + + [Background information] + The Package description explains the package well + Upstream Name is protobuf-c + Link to upstream project https://github.com/protobuf-c/protobuf-c ** Description changed: [Availability] The package protobuf-c is already in Ubuntu universe, and was in main some years ago. The package protobuf-c builds for the architectures it is designed to work on. It currently builds and works for architectures: amd64 arm64 armhf i386 ppc64el riscv64 s390x Link to package https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c [Rationale] - The package protobuf-c is required in Ubuntu main for fwupd 1.7.x to handle firmware updates for Logitech devices that use logitech_bulkcontroller such as their 4k webcams. - The feature is only goi
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
Hi Mario, Thanks for the request, given so much time passed I think we might want to apply the full process of today which has much harder quality bars to pass. Furthermore this got demoted so long ago that according to [1] no team owns it anymore, not even for trusty or such. Therefore this won't be just "bring it back in". We'd need to find a team that is willing to commit owning protobuf-c and once that is clear kick off the MIR process by filling in all of the template (as if it is entirely new). [1]: http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/m-r-package-team-mapping.html ** Changed in: protobuf-c (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 1956617] Re: [MIR] protobuf-c
The original MIR request was bug #801735 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1956617 Title: [MIR] protobuf-c To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/protobuf-c/+bug/1956617/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
