this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
146 points (98.7% liked)

Programming

17418 readers
238 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
snowe@programming.dev
Ategon@programming.dev
MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz
146
Dev rejects CVE severity, makes his GitHub repo read-only (www.bleepingcomputer.com)
submitted 4 months ago by AnActOfCreation@programming.dev to c/programming@programming.dev
9 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • The developer of the 'node-ip' project made the GitHub repository read-only after disputing the severity of a reported vulnerability (CVE-2023-42282).
  • The vulnerability involved incorrect identification of private IP addresses in non-standard formats, but the developer argued it had a dubious security impact.
  • The situation highlights ongoing issues with unverified CVE reports causing unnecessary panic and frustration for open-source project maintainers.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] flumph@programming.dev 72 points 4 months ago (3 children)

The library hadn't had any updates in 2 years before this. Clearly it wasn't maintained. If you're a user and bothered by this super edge case "vulnerability", fork it and take on the responsibility yourself.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 70 points 4 months ago (1 children)

100%. I think the developer taking the project read only was not a temper tantrum, it was just them signifying they don't have time to maintain it. So now if you want anything to happen you must fork it.

[–] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 45 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I find this outcome delightful for all the compliance mandated organizations that are leaching with no intention to contribute back.

It could be really helpful for developers at pure leech organizations to make a case for being ready to contribute in an agile manner.

Now they're all stuck waiting on either a good Samaritan, or their lawyers to get out of the way of progress.

I have little doubt that the fix has been committed to private forks dozens of times already, of course.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 18 points 4 months ago

This whole debacle is a festival of stupidity:

  • It's a personal project that taxes the sole maintainer disproportionately.
  • Millions of idiots use it blindly and end up building elaborate software on it. https://xkcd.com/2347/
  • I'll bet you 99.99% of those idiots use it only for ip.isPrivate(), which you can write yourself in 5 minutes.
  • The CVE is a non-issue (who the fuck would call a function that takes string notation with hex numbers?)
  • Appealing and reverting or downgrading CVEs is super complicated.

At this point the maintainer is fucked no matter what they do, so archiving the project and telling everybody to fuck off right back was really the only sane thing to do.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Clearly it wasn't maintained.

Lol. It's an IP library. IP classifications haven't changed. What could he possibly update?

[–] spartanatreyu@programming.dev 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

There's a whole bunch of pull requests and issues sitting there for a start.

Personally I'd also update the example in the readme and set an engine value in the package.json file.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 9 points 4 months ago

Then fork it and do that.

These projects are structured as hobbyist projects and get whatever time the maintainer can spare. I have projects like that, they're useful, but I'm not gonna prioritize them over... anything else, come to think of it.

The fact so many people treat a hobbyist project with one maintainer as critical infrastructure is insane, but that's on them. Everybody likes free software, nobody likes to help or pay the maintainer.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

"unchanged" isn't "unmaintained". Wow, that's a really short-sighted take.