Post
The other day me and @gregkh shot down a draft proposal to add a new role in the CVE ecosystem (SADP: "supplier ADP") that would append data to CVEs with details about dependencies and how they are or are not vulnerable to each particular CVE.
Imagine the amount of dependencies that use curl or the Linux kernel etc. These sweet innocent proposal makers thought in the terms of 5-10 dependencies per CVE. Not tens or hundreds of thousands which is far from unthinkable.
ICYMI, here's a paper that was trying to answer this research question in the context of #OpenSource #Java projects on GitHub: "What do open-source maintainers think about integrating #VEX into their existing SBOMs?"
TL;DR: "In most cases, our augmented SBOMs were not directly accepted because developers required a continuous SBOM update."
ICYMI, here's a paper that was trying to answer this research question in the context of #OpenSource #Java projects on GitHub: "What do open-source maintainers think about integrating #VEX into their existing SBOMs?"
TL;DR: "In most cases, our augmented SBOMs were not directly accepted because developers required a continuous SBOM update."
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
