Aruna S M: Welcome everyone.
Aruna S M: Welcome to our pleasures security of the task force.
Aruna S M: and
Aruna S M: Before we get started, please make sure you have read through our paradigm to trust policy, which states that.
Aruna S M: All these meetings and discussions that we are having or in public forum, and then we have to behave.
Aruna S M: Accordingly, and public sector.
Aruna S M: So with that.
Aruna S M: let's get started, but.
Aruna S M: The discussion for today, I know in previous meetings we wanted to go through, and then probably start writing down or putting down possible threats across different.
Aruna S M: different areas or I would say, different categories that we come up with.
Aruna S M: So we'll probably start from there.
Aruna S M: I know.
Aruna S M: This was put up.
Hart Montgomery: Go ahead and merge your changes it.
Aruna S M: Oh sure I was not sure how to do that, so should we go ahead and merge all the proposals that come in, or do we say when proposal is raised.
Hart Montgomery: it's empty it's up to you all, but I like.
Hart Montgomery: I gave you permission, I think, so you all, should have permissions on the repo.
Aruna S M: agree.
Aruna S M: So what I would suggest, probably go through the updates that were made on the paper in this call, and that would trigger some more ideas on thought process on what else to be included in the in the third section.
Aruna S M: And I don't see it as an exhaustive list, I still see there is possibility for us to think through.
Hart Montgomery: More yeah I totally agree.
Hart Montgomery: But you should push a new changes, though.
Aruna S M: yeah I really do it right away.
Danno Ferrin: i'm partying every sense of invites my invite expired, because I didn't accept it before I switched repos.
Okay.
Hart Montgomery: But should it should have a.
Hart Montgomery: I added I gave tasc members access.
Hart Montgomery: Or at least, it was said that was I checked the box That said, it would do that so.
Danno Ferrin: I get pushed doesn't like me.
Hart Montgomery: Oh OK.
Ry Jones: I guess is you.
Ry Jones: What you need to do is push to a branch and then it's probably hitting the D co sign off.
Hart Montgomery: My feet.
Ry Jones: High so.
Danno Ferrin: am pushing to change.
Ry Jones: I don't know.
Ry Jones: Forget to your repo and then do the thing and then make a PR heck I don't know.
Hart Montgomery: yeah i've got a fork.
Ry Jones: I hate.
Hart Montgomery: It yeah so it's works better.
Hart Montgomery: Some reason.
Hart Montgomery: yeah okay it's also not going to perfectly compile because it seems to.
Hart Montgomery: Eight My big files.
Hart Montgomery: For some reason they didn't copy.
Hart Montgomery: Right, did you add anything that.
Hart Montgomery: never made.
Aruna S M: It complaints, for me, too.
Hart Montgomery: Oh, but yeah the bid fails, though, so if you try to attack it, it will compile just the the bid fails.
Okay.
Hart Montgomery: I just need to put the bib.
Hart Montgomery: Back in.
Hart Montgomery: that's all for.
Hart Montgomery: Oh really it's just the.
it's weird.
Hart Montgomery: Just isn't like the crypto big headers.
Aruna S M: Okay, so coming coming back to where we are what points, we would like to discuss in this call is probably let's go through some of the traits that were added.
Aruna S M: In the past weeks.
Aruna S M: So i'm.
Aruna S M: Sorry, I thought you had something to comment.
Hart Montgomery: yeah.
Aruna S M: So I think it's easy for us to think through common traits let's say we don't need to really be that hard so I guess I took this inspiration from heart.
Aruna S M: So all you have to do is probably thing in terms of how do you break the system which which works for somebody right so.
Aruna S M: They just think.
Aruna S M: All possible ways of breaking the system and in whatever possible manners, it is possible from you.
Aruna S M: And when you when you also think in terms of how to break the system, look into these parameters, so I again went into these three parameters confidentiality.
Aruna S M: integrity and availability so let's say I have a blockchain network, how do I break it so that it's no longer available for anybody to use or let's say I have.
Aruna S M: One of the project types that heavily uses let's say a key for for all its transactions and make sure integrity is protected, of the Trans actor and also.
Aruna S M: Integrity of the block itself right is there a possibility, where somebody could come in and do some manipulations and try to disregard what was already done.
Aruna S M: In terms of confidentiality let's say a project claims to be having private transactions happening, but there is a real possibility of.
Aruna S M: There is no confidentiality as it is claimed in the documentation I guess that's captured in one of the threads already.
Aruna S M: But I would say, if you keep thinking in these terms, it would become more evident that you could keep adding more and more points, and then we could probably possibly aggregate them.
Aruna S M: into buckets even if you don't know where exactly to put them it's okay to write them down in the initial run so that we at least captured all the thought process and.
Aruna S M: go from there.
Aruna S M: yeah, how do you want it toward something.
Hart Montgomery: Just agree.
Hart Montgomery: You know.
Danno Ferrin: But we want to do it.
Danno Ferrin: Sorry stream of thoughts okay.
Hart Montgomery: yeah absolutely.
Hart Montgomery: So, so we want to do a first draft, where we just like think of all the possible things right.
Hart Montgomery: And then we come, then what we're gonna do is we're going to say well let's like group together right let's let's think of how we can, how we can package these more nicely right.
Hart Montgomery: because some of them will have a lot of things in common right.
Hart Montgomery: And then we can say, well, like let's think about prioritizing these like what's more important what's less important, you know this kind of thing right.
Hart Montgomery: Does that sort of makes sense as a high level process everybody.
Danno Ferrin: Does the.
Danno Ferrin: Some of the things don't fit into nice neat little boxes, the maybe as needed great news sites address what i'm thinking, I was wanting to the PR that I just push with my fork.
Danno Ferrin: But it's attacks on operational systems using things that might be bugs or things that might not be to force change splits and chain halls and.
Danno Ferrin: I mean it might just be a restatement of other types of threats, but the way that it services, I think, is fairly unique in the motivations for why you want to do it almost making the new attack surface because.
Danno Ferrin: At least in the public networks if you can make it misbehave for certain window of time and get your stuff off of an exchange them let emerge and get your money back on the types of bugs that would enable that.
Danno Ferrin: You know kind of feed it so because that's not the end game of what you're doing with it, but what they might be doing it's might be exploiting.
Danno Ferrin: A minor bug and one of the math libraries to cause consensus to break, but the end game is something some higher level.
Danno Ferrin: You know stability of the network attack, so I don't know how we want to you know because that's kind of a threat that works on multiple levels because got exploit code flaw.
Danno Ferrin: Maybe you got to check the code flop, and then you got to get it into an operating system and manipulate it in an operating system in a particular way and that impacts issues like when you find this math there that is gonna be consistent between versions, how do you.
Danno Ferrin: How do you share that information, how to make sure that it's not exploited and I guess that's you know another thing that gets a new things is.
Danno Ferrin: I mean yeah the whole patch Tuesday thing works great and the coordinated release, but when it's a live system, the stakes are higher.
Danno Ferrin: And the coordinator releases adjusting i'll give everyone in the world that you would give select people the fixed who are running the consensus nodes, then you would.
Danno Ferrin: release the code, then you would tell the world that order you make sure that the operational systems are fixed, because these are it's not like as.
Danno Ferrin: A server in a mailroom where it's you know someone's going to be using it to just do their mail because another aspect of this of this particular class a lot is.
Danno Ferrin: One weird thing was a penalty of failure is as higher because you can't just roll back a public chain and say, well, we screwed that up roll back to your days didn't play it all back.
Danno Ferrin: People have moved on and finalized it versus in the mail room if you just resend all the mail the wisdom is three days ago so it's out.
Danno Ferrin: I don't know quite how visit of these models, but those are the types of security threats that I see in public change that I haven't really seen in any other systems.
Danno Ferrin: guess those would be infrastructural threats, but it comes down to how do you mitigate it enhancing react to it that changes the nature of it.
Hart Montgomery: yeah I mean These are all good things to think about right, I mean.
Hart Montgomery: We just want to get sort of everything on paper in some form right, and then we can then we can start to think about.
Hart Montgomery: How, these are related or how we might mitigate them right.
Hart Montgomery: So.
Danno Ferrin: You.
Danno Ferrin: Know mitigation strategies.
Hart Montgomery: But we're eventually going to get there right.
Hart Montgomery: Right, but we want to like build, we want to define like what security is before we show that something is secure right.
Hart Montgomery: This is a problem that you know you see a lot.
Hart Montgomery: In.
Hart Montgomery: In people that you know, want to talk about security, but maybe aren't as experienced as they try to they try to say or argue approve security without saying what it is first right.
Hart Montgomery: So, so our goal here is to is to say what security is right.
Hart Montgomery: And so that's what we're trying we're trying to do here right.
Aruna S M: Can you want to say something.
Hart Montgomery: Sorry go ahead.
Artem Barger: Yes, I just wanted to to to make to the point that you know even before defining what the securities, I would also try to define what exactly we're trying to achieve the you know.
Artem Barger: Like what what, what are we trying to protect here, or what are we trying to a basically a you know, a heavier than solution, so I went through this document and so that you know.
Artem Barger: Maybe we are trying to also a meal, the garden save that process of developing Open Source projects within hyper ager, we would like to make sure that.
Artem Barger: The outcome of the development is also secure in in a way that you know the best practices, been implemented and.
Artem Barger: We are not into to our projects from you know we can hyper hyper ledger is not introducing a new on abilities are we trying to do to kind of.
Artem Barger: accommodate in everything we have these like you know, have a pretty rigorous a ci CD pipeline and a protecting the binary outcomes say images, I like.
Artem Barger: Re fabric, we are, we are releasing a very much to say, and you know.
Artem Barger: We never would like to make sure that they protected by by some signatures, like, I know that there is a some project called inadvertently running by red hat called six door.
Artem Barger: There you can basically say safely safely sign your by numbers and then everyone will be able to also.
Artem Barger: verify it I think they they using something pretty similar to the to the blockchain about you know I would, I will try to formulate, what are we trying to protect it is a final like you're the end goal of the exercise that they're doing before even defining what the security is.
Hart Montgomery: uh yeah, so I think defining so that's a that's a good point for my perspective, what you described like what are we trying to protect is sort of defining security.
Hart Montgomery: So, like if your security definition doesn't say what you're trying to do to protect that it's kind of a bad security definition right.
Hart Montgomery: At least that was my opinion, maybe I did a bad job of explaining it.
Hart Montgomery: Does that kind of answer your question.
Hart Montgomery: or address your comments.
Artem Barger: yeah yeah I will I wasn't asking the question I was making a comment to your previous point and I agree with you, but there are.
Artem Barger: Several layers of definition of security and there's you know, there you might brought a kind of your in umbrella the broader definition of what security means.
Artem Barger: And then, a you know, trying to decompose it on the lower lower layer and trying to define which pieces of your process you're trying to secure right.
Artem Barger: So i'm trying to to to to see that in a in a in a in a structured and allow the way of saying that this is a security.
Artem Barger: Lisa components that you would like to protect this is the processes, but best practices, like assigning containers a.
Artem Barger: Introducing clean their house to go to make sure that the, no, no, no ability to be introduced with you call me.
Artem Barger: Or, for example, have a so Scott or party dependencies scans to make sure that there is no, there is no one improves inevitable third party laboratory to the project like.
Artem Barger: There is, there is a whole set of a lot of things that they've been implemented, but them i'm just trying to go to divide it into the pieces that you know we can we can we can then addressing each of the each of these is separated.
Artem Barger: doesn't make sense, oh i'm.
Hart Montgomery: yeah so I mean you're you're talking a lot about medications there.
Hart Montgomery: So you know, I was hoping we would think about you know.
Hart Montgomery: threats and security definitions before we sort of like.
Hart Montgomery: got to litigations.
Hart Montgomery: Just to sort of make sure that you know the mitigation is covered everything, and I mean this is something i've seen that that happens, a lot in practice with when people just try to like.
Hart Montgomery: slap fixes on a problem you know they just throw solutions at a problem that rather than thinking about sort of what the problem is then the solutions don't always match up to the problem.
Hart Montgomery: And you have issues, and this is.
Hart Montgomery: This was especially true for me with stuff like privacy and confidentiality.
Hart Montgomery: Does that make sense.
Artem Barger: yeah.
yeah.
Hart Montgomery: awesome.
Hart Montgomery: So in yeah I agree, you know, we want to layer things, this is a huge problem and we want to separate out.
Hart Montgomery: We want to separate things out into manageable chunks right.
Artem Barger: yeah no that's I think the way to go forward.
Artem Barger: I mean the whole the whole the whole security thing is is one big a huge project and then obviously we won't be able to to to to to do it one chunk, so we will have to to to to cut it into the pieces and you know make make a process progress the step by step, I mean.
Hart Montgomery: yeah absolutely and that was the goal here is, we would think about sort of the threats right.
Hart Montgomery: So I come lash I, you should definitely talk next.
Hart Montgomery: yeah do to go ahead.
Kamlesh Nagware: No, I don't like the word.
Hart Montgomery: yeah, we should think about the threats, and that was another goal of his exercises, we can think about the threats we can group them and then we can prioritize right, we can say, well, this is the most critical thing and we need to like solve this first that kind of thing right.
Hart Montgomery: So i'm agreeing with you further item and kamalesh, would you please go ahead.
Kamlesh Nagware: I.
Kamlesh Nagware: think that was what is the outcome and delivers out of this.
Kamlesh Nagware: and finding threat, and I really find where is the security gap in the hyper ledger for this, that is one thing and then what other.
Kamlesh Nagware: task force will do is define the implementation also is the program code base implementation or the practices, so I think this thing bill can define like autumn autumn of this case, it should be like this will deliverance.
Kamlesh Nagware: And, and then they because I tried to go through it, but not over to.
Kamlesh Nagware: contribute likes what what is the outcome and how we.
Kamlesh Nagware: Define.
Kamlesh Nagware: So that.
Hart Montgomery: that's a great question, so I had envisioned a couple of things sorry did someone else want to talk.
Hart Montgomery: I didn't see your hand but.
Hart Montgomery: So.
Aruna S M: nicely.
Hart Montgomery: pillars, so I had envisioned.
Hart Montgomery: Like so like security recommendations coming out of this.
Hart Montgomery: You know, some kind of document that outlined.
Hart Montgomery: Some some best practices that need to be followed.
Hart Montgomery: Some specifications, you know.
Hart Montgomery: One of the things that we discussed internally that we might want this to solve is, you know how do we allocate as hyper ledger resources for security audits right.
Hart Montgomery: You know.
Hart Montgomery: We probably can't fix.
Hart Montgomery: Particularly for issues that affect lots of different projects we probably can't fix all of those and we you know, although we have maintainer from a lot of projects on this call.
Hart Montgomery: We probably can't like you know force projects to to accept changes.
Hart Montgomery: So, so I don't know how much code stuff is in scope of this task force.
Hart Montgomery: You know, but if people want to get to that level.
Hart Montgomery: You know I don't think anyone would be opposed.
Hart Montgomery: To that answer your question.
Kamlesh Nagware: yeah I didn't.
Kamlesh Nagware: I didn't I just didn't like it nano server like someone in the hyper ledger in the chapter is one company implementing a hyper ledger fabric Open Source docker images they concerned about the security audit they have done and I they approach to the hyper ledger think like.
Kamlesh Nagware: who's responsible of the security things like iPad, so I think, so I think whether the code is not a scope of this task force, but what could be the maybe involvement of the other icon other projects at the end of this year status for to.
Kamlesh Nagware: go through the best practice recommendation, but she defined in the paper and.
Kamlesh Nagware: yeah so try to check it what could be done an implement and.
Kamlesh Nagware: How can we ensure for the end user consumer like this is the already tested hyper ledger project.
Hart Montgomery: yeah that's exactly right and we could even tell them right, we can say like hey you're doing it you're not doing X and you need to be doing it right.
Kamlesh Nagware: yeah.
Hart Montgomery: So so like we can issue you know, like.
Hart Montgomery: You know, we can we can say that, like hey this needs to be done and then like you know.
Hart Montgomery: You know, we don't necessarily have to implement it.
Hart Montgomery: In some things there may be.
Hart Montgomery: There may be open ended ways to do a solution that, and you know the projects may not want a fixed way of doing things.
Hart Montgomery: But yeah I mean that look, and this is sort of what I thought.
Hart Montgomery: We want to do here if anybody has you know other ideas you know if you think this isn't going to work or, if you think other ways will work better like please feel free to speak up.
Hart Montgomery: I have a lot of bad ideas.
Hart Montgomery: So shoot them down when you see them.
Kamlesh Nagware: No, I think I gave good I think one of the first identifying threats of security gaps, then implementing our kind of recommendation, there is a there is, I think right thing to do, as a starting point.
Aruna S M: So I mean I strong conclusion from this and, probably, I mean.
Aruna S M: What time thing starting to think at least now is after running these many meetings we initially started Security Task Force update thinking in terms of.
Aruna S M: What is the current process for all order at hyper ledger and what can be improved over there, but eventually turned out to be that hey, we have to also focus on and be prepared to deal with some of the things that other Open Source projects are probably not met or they have not defined.
Aruna S M: And I thought through some of these concepts and that's how probably caught.
Aruna S M: The scope kept growing bigger and bigger right, so I see a gap there in terms of what exactly like many people are still asking how can they get involved and what are we defining security as so probably let's put a brief.
Aruna S M: Agenda for the task force, I know that security itself is bigger than the task force.
Aruna S M: I mean.
Aruna S M: let's let's let's take it down in in steps right so let's say probably will say we'll add a deadline, saying that hey by April, this is what we are trying to achieve as part of Task Force and maybe by May, these are we will focus on next set of things.
Aruna S M: So, I guess, I agree with you, heart so probably we should continue focusing on.
Aruna S M: The threads and when we think of tribes, I also see what the point that otter mentioned.
Aruna S M: Like we will put that the in the agenda of.
Aruna S M: What is our objective of security and how do we define security itself and so that we can start thinking about threats on those on those objectives right so let's define that I see I can happen now, we can we can do that it's a good point to bring up.
Artem Barger: So I just wanted to make a point to the previous comment from more or less that with respect to the actual implementation, so I think the outcome of the of the task force is supposed to be settled kind of recommendation that is a.
Artem Barger: The project as active project that is running a hyper a Joe will have to align and being the set of recommendations in order to fulfill that the you know the security standards models and make sure that we understand all the phrase like you know.
Artem Barger: We have a lot of these procedures, a while a purchase reporting back in the statuses and they believe that you know, once we will have a set of recommendations we will just need to make sure that a project to be a been implemented this this procedure will say you know.
Artem Barger: Because otherwise, otherwise it I.
Artem Barger: cannot we cannot see how we can you know you know implemented within the task force that the set of recommendations So what exactly are we going to implement here.
Hart Montgomery: So.
Hart Montgomery: Your question is about what are your comment I should say, is about the actionability of the task force.
Artem Barger: No, I was saying, because in my mind, I was kind of under the impression that conventions actually.
Artem Barger: alluding to the fact that we will you know after the finish the work we reveal implemented pieces of the of the of the outcomes of that you know, the task force.
Artem Barger: And I will say that, in my opinion, that we will be know the outcome of a of the task force movie the set of recommendations and the you know.
Artem Barger: We might we might bring them back to the gc meetings, just to make sure that the people is in alignment in agreement and the you know them, we can make are the projects under the hyper ledger umbrella just to implement those recommendations.
Artem Barger: So let's kind of a general comment right it's not it's not really a question just you know comment or suggestion what what we would what we trying to achieve and what this would be the the final the final kind of outcome of the exercise we're trying to do in Task Force.
Aruna S M: academy article so right so as a task force, we are here to recommend and find out the gaps are probably tell what can be done in implementation is a later question, and if it, I mean that's the later part the the the fruit nice of all.
Aruna S M: I would save there are no other comments on margin and that the topic itself in terms of hey, what are we doing in the task force probably let's start thinking in terms of.
Aruna S M: So, given the broad categories that heart suggested initially thinking in terms of there is infrastructure level trips and there is architecture level traits and then there could be implementation.
Aruna S M: Security issues at the implementation so looking at this whole process so initially also, if you look at the initial paragraph so probably are tries to capture it and just trying to say that when we talk about Open Source projects it's it's broad scope plus mean broad.
Aruna S M: broad scope and the focus should not be just on the implementation, but also on how we deliver the software, how we protect the rest of the infrastructure as well, so going by that understanding for now right.
Aruna S M: So, and making it relevant to open source development, as well as blockchain technology that start.
Aruna S M: thinking and and thinking about the tracks right.
Aruna S M: So I mean when I say when I hear the word infrastructure rights and correct me if I get it differently, I hear things such as a various my code located or.
Aruna S M: What is my build process and what is my release process looking like how do, how am I protecting my.
Aruna S M: My binaries and how do I, ensure that nobody is able to.
Aruna S M: duplicate and then claim that mean impersonate as if they are releasing official software's and so these are some of the questions and I would also put things such as.
Aruna S M: Am I leaving some of my secret information through these infrastructure right or am I setting proper permissions so that we are accountable as a community So these are some of the aspects that would come to my mind when I start thinking in terms of infrastructure.
Aruna S M: Any comments and thoughts on that.
Hart Montgomery: yeah I agree.
Artem Barger: Oh, you know that's all that's all good point and actually I also have somebody pointed out to her so so.
Artem Barger: And, but I have an equation, so it shouldn't be also align this task force work with a openings except open a.
Artem Barger: Security group that you know.
Artem Barger: there's only I think it's running on the Linux foundation Open Source security foundation open a separate if i'm not mistaken yeah it's necessary so should.
Artem Barger: We also aligned to.
Artem Barger: This to this kind of.
Artem Barger: images.
Hart Montgomery: So I will say we already are.
Hart Montgomery: So i've been talking extensively to Brian and to obviously you know, Brian is is in charge of the open ssf right.
Hart Montgomery: yeah so I have been talking with him and.
Hart Montgomery: I believe it's Dan.
Hart Montgomery: extensively about this.
Hart Montgomery: and
Hart Montgomery: We are aligned the, the main issue with open ssl.
Hart Montgomery: is open ssl is primarily focused on.
Hart Montgomery: sort of the weakest parts of the Open Source security.
Hart Montgomery: So, their main goal is is like is to find the weakest links of things.
Hart Montgomery: Like find the critical software where no one is paying attention to security.
Hart Montgomery: And and make sure that gets fixed.
Hart Montgomery: We don't want to be the weakest link in the chain to the end, like the open source community right, we need to be considerably stronger.
Hart Montgomery: So my thought is in you know this is.
Hart Montgomery: This is something that i've discussed with the open ssf people.
Hart Montgomery: Is that we're almost more of an upstream.
Hart Montgomery: They like this Security Task Force is almost upstream compared to open ssf.
Hart Montgomery: Where if we find things we should we should tell them.
Hart Montgomery: Because from their perspective there's there's like much more low hanging fruit than what we're doing.
Hart Montgomery: Did that answer your question Artem.
Artem Barger: Completely Thank you, I was the world.
Ry Jones: yeah I want to make a.
Kamlesh Nagware: rabbit further.
I want to make.
Ry Jones: I want to make a further clarification that.
Ry Jones: one.
Ry Jones: One other of rtc Members are know is spending a lot of time at on open ssf i'm not going to say that it's his primary focus.
Ry Jones: But he he i've talked to him a lot, and he has been a lot of time on openness SF so exactly as heart said, like hyper ledger experience is informing.
Ry Jones: The development of open ssf as it moves forward but, of course, if they get input from someone else we should yeah we should take advantage of that.
Artem Barger: Okay, thank you, oh.
Hart Montgomery: Yes, so whatever we document here, we will definitely send to them, and probably have a meeting with them right.
Hart Montgomery: But yeah it's a good point Artem and and we, we will we have been and will continue to address it accomplish.
Kamlesh Nagware: So I think I.
Kamlesh Nagware: Think, starting at 11 for the infrastructure perspective.
Kamlesh Nagware: I do have a definition of the infrastructure, a lot of in countries like are we also considering the kind of what kind of infrastructure, the hyper ledger frameworks deploy code running.
Kamlesh Nagware: On what kind of infrastructure perspective or something like.
Hart Montgomery: This sorry go ahead.
Aruna S M: No heart, you would be right person I was all about to say that.
Aruna S M: When we talk about infrastructure from hyper ledger perspective or from from this scope it's so deployment is the later point right, so what where we are is.
Aruna S M: Before we even deliver the software or during that process software delivery process so everything that encompasses including github are the letters let's say if you're using as your pipelines, for doing something on that kind of things sorry go ahead.
Hart Montgomery: girl, you did a great job answering the question.
Kamlesh Nagware: yeah God, you know, maybe.
Kamlesh Nagware: About 910 one, I believe it is for hosting potent hosting binary.
Aruna S M: So how do we want to do this, like discuss through some of the points put in here, or do you want to bring up some random points, and then we say oh this or not put in here, I would say, do I mean when infrastructure comes to you what kind of traits do you think is possible.
Hart Montgomery: yeah sorry, who said it.
Artem Barger: yeah then then, then you say infrastructure of race, and we don't in context of open source development I think it's a dope the whole.
Artem Barger: Supply supply delivery chain of the of the binary so on, you know of the software that you've been developing like because there is.
Artem Barger: There is no real infrastructure is it's not like you're in you're in development right record this in your on premises and and you know.
Artem Barger: and open source is what it is it's either located on github or get lab or bitbucket right, but we know, in particular as aboriginal ever make is a new crop, so we have.
Artem Barger: Our security infrastructure basically secure hold with Microsoft a babbling right, so the only thing that we can take care of is basically.
Artem Barger: A continuous integration continuous delivery implemented.
Artem Barger: properly.
Artem Barger: There is no never been introduced or.
Artem Barger: Or you know explodes been implemented obey imported by the fruit, the third party libraries.
Artem Barger: And I the last part, I think that you know, we would like to make sure that a binary is the outcome of the sea ice or you know, whatever we are trying to do is is basically authentic so we can implement some signing process that makes sure that they you know.
Artem Barger: People who is actually using the software, the end the end the end binary is basically aware of what exactly they have at hand right.
Artem Barger: So that's that's that's an IBM the you know the infrastructure that they have to others, so you know malicious developers I think it's a good point there just to make sure that no no longer abilities or efforts, but it was been built into the into the software.
Artem Barger: Software develop develop delivery man and Beatles so you know just make sure that there is no injection.
Artem Barger: Or, there is no bugs in our pipeline that basically allow someone to explode and inject a runner real code, for instance, like you're in fabric.
Artem Barger: We deliver by nervous for the picking them into the into the docker but if they our pipeline and being exploited.
Artem Barger: And someone is actually able to inject anything into the container that maybe you might have a problem, and so these are, these are the friends that I see while speaking infrastructure in context of open source projects.
Aruna S M: happy.
Aruna S M: To which are can you hear me yes Okay, do we want to explicitly.
Peter Somogyvari : exclude physical threats such as someone literally broke into our data Center for prosperity pi online network, and now they have access to that.
Hart Montgomery: So, no, I think this is, we should include this whether you want to include this as an infrastructure altered implementation flat threat is.
Hart Montgomery: Is you know up for debate, but you know, I think it.
Hart Montgomery: There have been a number of so called distributed blockchains where.
Hart Montgomery: A single cloud service going out has completely stopped the blockchain from running great.
Hart Montgomery: That would certainly be a threat to me right if if everyone hosts their nodes on the same cloud service.
Hart Montgomery: And that might be a less like that's even happened right we've seen this happen.
Hart Montgomery: So I think.
Aruna S M: it's an implementation, and I mean.
Aruna S M: it's true.
Aruna S M: yeah it's a it's a warning kind of notice that we should be giving.
Aruna S M: it's a warning to be coming.
Aruna S M: are probably a bad choice I don't know.
Peter Somogyvari : i'm flexible alert, I really just wanted to clarify fee.
Aruna S M: even want to list it, or do we just want to put it as an assumption that physical intrusion.
Hart Montgomery: It or anything don't assume anything like assumptions come later right.
Okay.
Peter Somogyvari : Okay, then I can try and put some of this down and take the paper.
Hart Montgomery: Down oh I merged your PR.
Hart Montgomery: But.
Hart Montgomery: In the future mission sorry what.
Danno Ferrin: A little rambling on it, but in the future, I should.
Hart Montgomery: Just merge yourself.
Danno Ferrin: I couldn't I couldn't push the merge button.
Danno Ferrin: Really yeah.
Ry Jones: I will i'll check the settings on the repo.
Hart Montgomery: yeah some weirdness is happening your changes aren't showing I can't pull your changes locally, but it could just be github being weird.
Hart Montgomery: we'll figure it out.
Ry Jones: I will point out.
Ry Jones: I know this is probably redundant, since all of us probably live on hacker news every day in a reading every little thing that comes along but pretty much every day this week github has had terrible operational problems.
Ry Jones: So it would not surprise me at all if it was still having terrible operational problems.
Hart Montgomery: yeah.
Ry Jones: it's speaking frozen four days yeah yeah like the bots aren't running the ci is not running it's terrible.
Hart Montgomery: This is an infrastructure security threat right.
Hart Montgomery: Like yeah.
Aruna S M: So this isn't tried to have probably.
Aruna S M: one server dependency that you just called out.
Aruna S M: Oh yeah absolutely.
Aruna S M: Not distributing.
Aruna S M: I wanted to also call out there's insufficient test beds that are available for open source projects, so there is inherent assumption that many of the project teams make.
Aruna S M: That they may not have a proper test batch setup they may not have tested all the scenarios, but i've seen in some of the hyper ledger project itself where.
Aruna S M: The companies that implement go and implementing they would come back and say hey my blockchain stopped working after let's say producing these many blocks and I can't seem to figure out what's really happening right.
Aruna S M: And there could be some some potential issues that that people can exploit but it's not clearly visible to to maybe naked eyes and maybe we need certain scenarios to be executed in certain conditions So how do we, I mean that's that's a trick to me.
Hart Montgomery: yeah insufficient test is definitely a threat.
Hart Montgomery: One of the things that you know we can think about this, as we can, like.
Hart Montgomery: If we have like a sufficient description of threats, then we can use that to inform us efficient description of test cases right.
Hart Montgomery: But maybe you know, obviously nothing's perfect, but you know we could.
Hart Montgomery: We can offer some recommendations right.
Aruna S M: So I mean, probably, we can also recommend.
Aruna S M: So I know reproducibility is, it is a tough thing to expect when the implementation goes.
Aruna S M: From that perspective, we need additional information.
Aruna S M: I don't know if we can define some process could let.
Aruna S M: That would let us collect more information about both that issue, but i've seen such things happening.
Oh.
Aruna S M: And one more common issue that I see many people follow is they probably mean improper usage of of source version control management itself right, so they push some secrets directly into the repository.
Hart Montgomery: yeah.
Aruna S M: So, in terms of architecture, I know I mean if we if there are any other comments on on the infrastructure.
Aruna S M: I would also say it like keep this open in a way that let's also do offline.
Aruna S M: I mean it's all about thinking process right so just think through all possibilities, if you think more things can be added here, please add them and we should.
Aruna S M: I mean we should try our best to think through all possible cases item sorry you want you're unmuted and wanted to say something.
Artem Barger: Well, the total says to say anything so.
Aruna S M: Always.
Aruna S M: An architectural level traits, if I may move on.
Aruna S M: Given like we have 10 more minutes on the task force called i'm giving a quick overview of what I think is architectural right and not correct me if i'm don't get it right is in a way let's say some of these projects are design right, for instance.
Aruna S M: This was the one pointed out to me by one of the person or over the linkedin chart the person is from one of the banking farms and they are using hyper ledger solutions in there, so in.
Aruna S M: A manipulator project in their solution and the person pointed out that.
Aruna S M: All the examples that they find on let's say in the repository and in even through the went through the documentation and architectural diagrams but none of them mentioned.
Aruna S M: What is in the.
Aruna S M: Call do we say the data classification information right so.
Aruna S M: There are some parameters which are related to implementation that are needed to be considered highly confidential versus confidential or it's okay to share with others, so.
Aruna S M: When the person pointed out that the project documentation lacks something like that I started thinking through a probably, so this is something.
Aruna S M: We can recommend some of these projects, at least if not document it's not just at least call out them in the in the architecture diagrams or or anything actor writer right, so that those who go and implement them, they are aware of how to consider some of these parameters.
Aruna S M: and architectural traits could be anything related to how the project itself is being designed and how it is being presented out.
Aruna S M: And so, some of these you can say, for instance, like Okay, this project follows this particular consensus protocol.
Aruna S M: But it's and it is based on some claims and some academic papers and but that's not.
Aruna S M: mean that itself is broken ugly compromised somebody found like hey, this is not the right.
Aruna S M: I mean, this is not going to provide these guarantees which are claimed.
Aruna S M: And, and I don't know if people still do self invented cryptography but that's not the case for sure.
i've seen it.
Hart Montgomery: Well, a room we've seen it a number of We actually had a bug a few years ago, an indie.
Hart Montgomery: It wasn't.
Hart Montgomery: Fully self invented cryptography.
Hart Montgomery: But it was people attempted to extend the scheme for optimization purposes and their extension ended up breaking it.
Hart Montgomery: So they changed it like just very slightly and they ended up completely cut ended up compromising security.
Hart Montgomery: We also have seen people use cryptography like in appropriately.
Hart Montgomery: So, like I don't know if you all are familiar with, like a threshold signature bls signature Roque public key attack.
Hart Montgomery: But that has turned up in a number of different blockchain applications, including in hyper ledger.
Hart Montgomery: So so like we you know, at least in hyper ledger we haven't seen anyone like try to reinvent like their own a, for instance, but.
Hart Montgomery: We have seen people make minor tweaks.
Hart Montgomery: And, and this architectural threat category, you know, there are a lot of like definitions and just using things properly.
Hart Montgomery: One of the big things we see is is is, and I think it's probably on the next page.
Hart Montgomery: Or maybe not.
Hart Montgomery: Is privacy and confidentiality like.
Hart Montgomery: People yeah this is poor definitions thing so like people say that something is private or confidential and they don't say what it means, and people who use the system infer that it means more than what it actually means and that becomes a big problem right.
Hart Montgomery: Does that make sense to everybody.
Artem Barger: Basically I you know it's always lack of differentiation, a lot of.
Artem Barger: realization yes and so that way there's always a problem.
Artem Barger: Not, not only in security.
Hart Montgomery: yeah absolutely it's a big problem.
Muhammad Muhasin: yeah you know that.
Muhammad Muhasin: Is.
Muhammad Muhasin: Peter.
Peter Somogyvari : So I had one that i'm not sure if it's an entirely new category or.
Peter Somogyvari : purchase one of these, but I was thinking about when when management tells the software engineers that backwards compatibility must be kept, but then the stuff that they keep is actually security hole.
Peter Somogyvari : And then obviously it's an implementation thing because it's the software engineers typing out the code to make things backward compatible but they're actually being driven by.
Peter Somogyvari : management so maybe there's some sort of policy fret or.
Something else.
Hart Montgomery: Out there ya know like.
Hart Montgomery: that's that's a great architectural issue right, you should add that to the document.
Hart Montgomery: Like excessive backwards compatibility or something like that right.
Hart Montgomery: Sorry guys for that my dog is upset.
walking after the meeting.
Hart Montgomery: I think she just wants a second breakfast which she's not getting.
Hart Montgomery: Oh.
Peter Somogyvari : it's Friday I.
Aruna S M: can't be.
Aruna S M: So Peter I would assume you will you will add to this as a PR.
Yes.
Aruna S M: Perfect thanks Peter.
Hart Montgomery: And you guys yeah go feel free to just add like if you're not like deleting stuff if you're just adding stuff just merge your own PR.
Hart Montgomery: You know, we don't need to.
Hart Montgomery: we're in an informal stage, right now, so.
Hart Montgomery: just go for it.
Aruna S M: So.
Aruna S M: Since we already like last three minutes of the call I wanted to also covered what we understand, as I mean, so that we all understand what implementation tracks are.
Aruna S M: So when we talk about implementation, they can be two aspects, not necessarily the code implementation that we have, but it could also imply the implementation of the project itself and short code implementation is this to be covered, as well, but.
Aruna S M: We should also try to cover where the project is is let's say meeting certain criteria for implementing that project as a solution so that people can start using it.
Aruna S M: So some of the traits that come under over implementation could covers could have issues such as.
Aruna S M: let's say.
Aruna S M: I mean you can see, for instance, poor memory management and the consensus implementation So these are low hanging or commonly known issues but i'm trying to think through a case which is.
Aruna S M: let's say, for instance project never for whites of it sorry.
Muhammad Muhasin: Oh.
Aruna S M: whoops.
Aruna S M: Okay, so let's say the tape project never provides a mechanism and let's say project is designed in a way that it is, it is mandating me to.
Aruna S M: Share across my keys, and probably persisted somewhere or progress it's like shading a secret key across to come on a private key across two components are.
Muhammad Muhasin: Any request one one thing.
Muhammad Muhasin: I need to face with eating after we use home party with me an audition before I had confusing them all confused what he won't be.
Muhammad Muhasin: As I am also want humor more problems are to have everything you just to see my phone also editor I called get that money problem have our family have that's like.
Aruna S M: I.
Aruna S M: would assume we should more.
Aruna S M: How do you want to cover our quickly talk about implementation threats.
Hart Montgomery: I think you did a great job but yeah this, these are the.
Hart Montgomery: These cover.
Hart Montgomery: With the code issues you added some other implementation issues.
Hart Montgomery: You know this could also cover deployment issues as someone pointed out earlier, I think it was Peter, but I could be wrong and we don't have any like deployment issues.
Hart Montgomery: You know mentioned here.
Hart Montgomery: So, so I think all of these are good topics and people have suggested some good things today, so you know i'd love to.
Hart Montgomery: see people.
Hart Montgomery: Add them to the document.
Aruna S M: Perfect so the immediate action items are probably adding destinations for the task force for the for the delivery, I mean just so that we can put boundary.
Aruna S M: yeah so that we can put boundary for the task force and we are all focused on what exactly the expected outcomes are and continuing adding more threats to each of the sections in probably adding some destinations to each of these sections.
Aruna S M: And with that.
Aruna S M: We are on top of ours, we are, and I would request you to work offline and let's keep keep it rolling.
Hart Montgomery: Also thanks so definitely love it if people.
Hart Montgomery: did add stuff offline.
Hart Montgomery: I know.
Sorry for being so.
Kamlesh Nagware: Thank.
Kamlesh Nagware: You.