-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SLSA v1.0: shift emphasis to expectations + verification in levels.md #503
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for slsa ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great to see this being fleshed out. I made suggestions inline to consistently use "as expected" rather than "as documented/expected".
8e18925
to
e30efdc
Compare
Thanks. I updated the language as suggested and rebased onto the latest version of #502. |
e30efdc
to
02510ea
Compare
Previously the specification only required the publication of provenance but did not say anything about its verification. The latter is what actually detects or prevents attacks, so this was a big gap. Futhermore, the previous "scripted build" requirement did not have a clear reason why it was included. Now there is explicit language around: - Defining an expectation of how the package should be built, replacing the previous "scripted build" requirement. - Verifying that the provenance meets expectations. NOTE: This commit only changes levels.md. A future commit will make an equivalent change to the rest of the spec, e.g. requirements.md. Signed-off-by: Mark Lodato <[email protected]>
02510ea
to
de5117a
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks. Do you think we should provide guidance on how to verify provenance meets expectations (and is signed) for users of the SLSA provenance format?
Yes. I assume that would be a necessary part of #46. This PR here is only a first step. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Preview: https://deploy-preview-503--slsa.netlify.app/spec/v1.0/levels
(As discussed in #130 and the Specification SIG meeting)
Previously the specification only required the publication of provenance but did not say anything about its verification. The latter is what actually detects or prevents attacks, so this was a big gap. Futhermore, the previous "scripted build" requirement did not have a clear reason why it was included.
Now there is explicit language around:
NOTE: This PR only changes levels.md. A future commit will make an equivalent change to the rest of the spec, e.g. requirements.md.
Related issues (not fully fixed): #46, #130, #371