Track Potential Adoption of NPM Audit Resolve / Counterclaim / Assertions

Open
#20 0 comments 1 reaction 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
25/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Mostly clear
Activity status
Stale
Tech stack
node.js
Domain
security

Research direction

Start by reading the new RFC at npm/rfcs#422 and its proposed file format in pkg-vuln-collab-space#11, then compare them with the older RFC and the CSAF 2.0 and CycloneDX VEX profiles. Done means determining whether LoopBack should adopt a format and recording the resulting decision or implementation path.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

openjsf

There's discussion in the Node.js ecosystem to create a standard file format to allow Node.js module authors to write a "counterclaim" against a vulnerability with one of its direct or nested dependency.

This is similar to CSAF 2.0 and CycloneDX VEX profiles, which allow software authors to similarly write about their evaluation on the practical impact of the vulnerability.

This issue is to keep track of these proposals.

The expected end-goal is to eventually adopt this file format alongside the CSAF 2.0 and CycloneDX VEX profiles.

Dominant language
TypeScript
Stars
4
Forks
1
No merged PRs in 30d

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from loopbackio/security

All issues in loopbackio/security

Similar issues

More TypeScript issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.