-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
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
Create SECURITY.md
#751
Create SECURITY.md
#751
Conversation
I don't see a reason to have patch-level pinning of dependencies. I propose to pin only the minor version levels:
This should be done in a separate PR/issue, possibly with the issue #747. |
Gunicorn is about to set up a security policy too, either via We could wait and see what their solution will be. |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #751 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.67% 99.67%
=======================================
Files 89 89
Lines 6404 6404
=======================================
Hits 6383 6383
Misses 21 21 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
I asked for a review from ChatGPT and addressed the good comments.
For this, I reworded the relevant part: "...note that most of the dependencies of a given Annif release are pinned only on minor version level...". |
Quality Gate passedKudos, no new issues were introduced! 0 New issues |
It is a good practice to inform how to report vulnerabilities, which is what
SECURITY.md
file is for.I have worded this inSECURITY.md
file:> However, the dependencies of a given Annif release are pinned only on minor version levelBut this is actually not true;[Edited this part to include a true statement.]There are the following patch level version pinnings:
2.14.2
0.9.2
1.4.1
0.4.5
Right now I don't remember why they are pinned to patch level. Need to check that. It would be good that all (security) patches of dependencies could be applied without the need to update Annif version. Does some of these dependencies have such a backward compatibility policy that conflicts with Annif's policy?
Also reword the bottom list.[Done.]Also at the moment Annif repo has Security advisories enabled (I enabled it when looking at this security reporting a while ago), which allows anyone to give a report via navigating to the Security tab in this repo. Having two reporting ways (finto-posti email and this reporting) can be confusing, so maybe the Security advisories functionality should be disabled.