Comment 4 for bug 2008742

Revision history for this message
Ioanna Alifieraki (joalif) wrote :

Review for Package: mini-iso-tools

[Summary]
The package looks ok, only autopkg tests missing.
In the security section I marked that it parses json from an untrusted
source, I am not sure about it, but since the package is
messing with installation I think a sec review is a good idea.

MIR team ACK under the constraint to resolve the below listed
required TODOs and as much as possible having a look at the
recommended TODOs.

This does need a security review, so I'll assign ubuntu-security
List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: mini-iso-tools

Notes:
Required TODOs:
1. Please add autopkg tests.

- The package already has a team subscriber.

[Duplication]
There is no other package in main providing the same functionality.

[Dependencies]
OK:
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this
  - checked with `check-mir`
  - all dependencies can be found in `seeded-in-ubuntu` (already in main)
  - none of the (potentially auto-generated) dependencies (Depends
    and Recommends) that are present after build are not in main
- no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion
- No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring
  more tests now.

Problems: None

[Embedded sources and static linking]
OK:
- no embedded source present
- no static linking
- does not have unexpected Built-Using entries
- not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- not a rust package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- Does not include vendored code

Problems: None

[Security]
OK:
- history of CVEs does not look concerning
- does not run a daemon as root
- does not use webkit1,2
- does not use lib*v8 directly
- does not open a port/socket
- does not process arbitrary web content
- does not use centralized online accounts
- does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop
- does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc)
- does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures)
- does not deal with cryptography (en-/decryption, certificates, signing, ...)

Problems:
- does not parse data formats (files [images, video, audio,
  xml, json, asn.1], network packets, structures, ...) from
  an untrusted source.

[Common blockers]
OK:
TODO: - does not FTBFS currently
- does have a test suite that runs at build time
  - test suite fails will fail the build upon error.
- no new python2 dependency

Problems:
- does not have a non-trivial test suite that runs as autopkgtest

[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does not carry a delta
- symbols tracking not applicable for this kind of code.
- d/watch is not present but also not needed (e.g. native)
- Upstream update history is good
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is good
- the current release is packaged
- promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far
  maintained the package
- no massive Lintian warnings
- d/rules is rather clean
- It is not on the lto-disabled list

Problems: None

[Upstream red flags]
OK:
- no Errors/warnings during the build
- no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it)
- no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside
  tests)
- no use of user nobody
- no use of setuid
- no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu
- no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-*

Problems:
- translation not present, but I don't think this is an issue for this
  kind of package