On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 06:47:16PM +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> * you need a strong authentication for the actions causing certain actions
> (e.g. QA decisions leading to package-builds, tickets which will be
> autobuilt (e.g. updates of "trusted" people)). This is required as an
> automated packagebuild and -publication process is extremely attractive
> for attackers (IMO).
Bugzilla *could* have better authentication, though. I believe the auth
stuff is now all modularized.
> * Bugzilla does not have an authorisation system for the ticket lifecycle
> (e.g. only owner of ticket can verify final build)
I can see how having that would be good, so that good practices are
> * Bugzilla does not have a voting system with authentication
Hmmm. Would this really be helpful?
> * Bugzilla is unsafe as authentication happens by a predicatable
> login_cookie (small integer increased by one at every login).
However, this login_cookie is tied to IP address, so while that's still bad,
it's not as horrible as it sounds. (Oh, I see comments from you in the
bugzilla bug about this already.) Anyway, not that I'm volunteering right
now, but I don't think it'd be a herculean effort to make it work in a Whole
Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
fedora-extras-list mailing list