[Lvfs-announce] Limiting sharing of embargo remotes
Richard Hughes <[email protected]> Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:46:14 +0000
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.lvfs-announce |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAD2FfiEEHnm=ePpU1H6U3pfFKJ5gtvS7m4Sytx_QX_xo04u9fg@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi all, Recently we discovered that at least one LVFS vendor was sharing the vendor-embargo.conf configuration to people outside of their vendor group. Knowing the remote access token is enough to download the vendor-specific metadata which *may* include firmware under security embargo and so sharing the access token is certainly not recommended by me. Vendors wanting to do this =E2=80=9Cthe correct way=E2=80=9D should = ask suppliers or QA companies to create a vendor account on the LVFS (still 100% free!) and then the specific firmware can be shared with them directly. I appreciate some vendors are relying on the not-recommended sharing access token feature right now, and don=E2=80=99t want to break that workfl= ow =E2=80=93 so don=E2=80=99t worry that everything is going to break. I=E2=80=99ve just merged a new feature in https://gitlab.com/fwupd/lvfs-website/-/merge_requests/1416 called =E2=80=9Crequire vendors to set the username and password when downloading embargoed metadata=E2=80=9D =E2=80=93 this makes it possible for vendors to= opt-in to the more secure mode of checking who is downloading metadata for an additional layer of protection. This means even if the remote access token is accidentally leaked, only users with an LVFS account in the correct vendor group can access it. So now I need to know from each vendor what embargo metadata permissions you=E2=80=99d like to choose. The choices are: * Only authenticated users =E2=80=93 the most secure mode =E2=80=93 a user= name and user token is required in the remote and the remote access token is less of a secret * All users =E2=80=93 the less secure mode =E2=80=93 only the remote acces= s token in the metadata URL is required At the moment the default is =E2=80=9Call users=E2=80=9D although this defa= ult will be swapped in the future. If you are an affected vendor that wants the insecure mode (sharing the embargo remote with other companies) can you also please tell me who you=E2=80=99re sharing it with =E2=80=93 as I= =E2=80=99d much rather set up the affiliate relationships in the LVFS so we=E2=80=99re able= to revoke or modify permissions in the future. Please reply to me personally, rather than the mailing list. Thanks! Richard