ANNOUNCE: Review requests

[Matthew Miller]

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
actually enforced.

> * 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
Different Way.


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>