Comment 1 for bug 1990570

Review for Package: ruby-ffi

[Summary]
TODO: WRITE - TBD The essence of the review result from the MIR POV
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. Although, this package passes the
MIR security checklist, it is used to dynamically load other libraries
from inside ruby code and therefore I believe a security review is needed.
I don't assign the bug to security team until the required todos are addressed.
List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: ruby-ffi

Notes:
TODO: - add todos, issues or special cases to discuss
Required TODOs:
1. Please make sure the latest version of ruby-ffi is packaged (1.15.5).
Current packaged version in both debian and ubuntu is 1.15.4 released
upstream in Sep 2021. The latest upstream release is 1.15.5 released in
Jan 2022.
Recommended TODOs:
- The package should get a team bug subscriber before being promoted

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

[Dependencies]
OK:
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this
  - ruby-ffi 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 parse data formats (files [images, video, audio,
  xml, json, asn.1], network packets, structures, ...) from
  an untrusted source.
- 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: None

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

Problems: None

[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does not carry a delta (all 3 patches present, inherited from debian)
- symbols tracking not applicable for this kind of code.
- d/watch is present and looks ok (if needed, e.g. non-native)
- Upstream update history is (good/slow/sporadic)
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is slow
- 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:
- the latest upstream release is 1.15.5, however in ubuntu/debian the packaged release is 1.15.4

[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-*
- not part of the UI for extra checks
- no translation present, but none needed for this case (user visible)?

Problems: None