Bug 1472368 - [RFE] OpenSCAP to support the new CVRF standard
[RFE] OpenSCAP to support the new CVRF standard
Status: NEW
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openscap (Show other bugs)
7.4
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Jan Černý
BaseOS QE Security Team
: FutureFeature
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2017-07-18 10:57 EDT by Martin Preisler
Modified: 2017-07-18 14:00 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Martin Preisler 2017-07-18 10:57:56 EDT
Currently OpenSCAP supports scanning for security vulnerabilities using the OVAL CVE feed format. This is also supported by Red Hat product security who release security feeds using CVE OVAL. See https://www.redhat.com/security/data/oval/

CVE OVAL served well in the past but it looks like most vendors (including Red Hat) are now moving to CVRF. See https://www.redhat.com/security/data/metrics/

There is a lot of synergy and similarities between the formats but CVRF allows more fine-grained metadata. Furthermore it isn't as strict when it comes to specifying how to actually scan for vulnerabilities. This sounds like a drawback but it allows us to scan JARs and maybe even other formats, not just RPM like CVE OVAL.

CVRF support in OpenSCAP would enable users of middle-ware and other Red Hat products to evaluate their infrastructure with minimal changes to OpenSCAP scripting. CVRF can fully replace OVAL CVE feed scanning in the future because it provides more contextual data. In addition we can enable scanning of non-RPM packages because CVRF doesn't specify how the evaluation should be done, this gives us implementation freedom to look into JAR, node.js, etc...

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.