[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: CVE ID Syntax Vote - results and next steps
This may seem a nit, but I'd like to add at least one option with
trailing zeros. I always have trouble scanning columns of numbers
when I have to ignore the zeros at the start.
Adam
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 05:01:24PM +0000, Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com wrote:
| There is one additional possibility that I did not include.
|
| OPTION H: Year + 12 digits, no leading 0's except IDs 1 to 999
|
| Kent Landfield
|
| McAfee | An Intel Company
| Direct: +1.972.963.7096
| Mobile: +1.817.637.8026
| Web: www.mcafee.com
|
| From: <Landfield>, Kent Landfield <Kent_Landfield@McAfee.com>
| Date: Friday, April 19, 2013 11:42 AM
| To: "cve-editorial-board-list@LISTS.MITRE.ORG" <
| cve-editorial-board-list@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
| Subject: Re: CVE ID Syntax Vote - results and next steps
|
|
| Can we have a quick poll on the combined set of existing options and the
| ones Art has listed below? I'd think a re-whittling of the choices may get
| us to a better place to conduct a vote.
| + Do you desire a static length of the CVE Ids? --Yes ? No
| + If so, what length do you feel would be acceptable to you?-- 6 ? 7 ? 12
| ? More? -- Something else?
| Here are options that combines what Art listed as well as the original two
| options. The original Option C has been dropped from this poll as a result
| of the initial vote.
|
| OPTION A: Year + 6 digits, with leading 0's
|
| OPTION B: Year + arbitrary digits, no leading 0's except IDs 1 to 999
|
| OPTION D: Year+ 7 digits with leading 0's
|
| OPTION E: Year + 12 digits with no leading zeros.
|
| OPTION F: Year + 12 digits with no leading zeros, starting at 1000 for each
| year.
|
| OPTION G: Year + Infinite digits with no leading zeros, starting at 1000
| for each year.
|
| Just want to take a pulse as to where we are?
|
| Kent Landfield
|
| McAfee | An Intel Company
| Direct: +1.972.963.7096
| Mobile: +1.817.637.8026
| Web: www.mcafee.com
|
| From: Art Manion <amanion@cert.org>
| Date: Thursday, April 18, 2013 11:19 PM
| To: "Booth, Harold" <harold.booth@nist.gov>
| Cc: "cve-editorial-board-list@lists.mitre.org" <
| cve-editorial-board-list@LISTS.MITRE.ORG>
| Subject: Re: CVE ID Syntax Vote - results and next steps
|
|
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
| Hash: SHA1
|
|
| On 2013-04-18 22:34, Booth, Harold wrote:
|
| | I would also add that with an Option B with no leading zeros,
| | including less than four digits, a transition of sorts is available
| | for the first year (or more) if CVE identifiers started at 1000.
| | Until the 9000'th CVE tools would successfully chug along giving
| | everyone a bit more transition time. This could allow even more
| | time depending on the eventual number of CVEs created. Whereas with
| | an Option A with padding there is no such transition, and whatever
| | number of digits are agreed to are included in every CVE from the
| | beginning (in 2014?).
|
| For the sake of further discussion, by no means an official set of
| choices...
|
| Option D: Seven numeric characters with leading zeros.
|
| Option E: Twelve numeric characters, no leading zeros.
|
| Option F: Twelve numeric characters, no leading zeros, starting at
| 1000 for each year.
|
| Option G: Infinite numeric characters, no leading zeros, starting at
| 1000 for each year.
|
| I picked 12 because someone suggested 10+. I'm also saying "numeric
| characters" to raise the issue of treating everything after "CVE" or
| "CVE-YYYY" as a string. Not sure that capping it makes much
| difference.
|
| Not sure this covers all the recently discussed options.
|
| Also not sure how to handle this situation procedurally? Declare a
| mistrial and prepare another ballot, after further discussion?
|
|
| ~ - Art
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
| Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Darwin)
| Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
|
| iEYEARECAAYFAlFwxdoACgkQk/8FEDbCaKOPEgCgnbaNJBjQESDRgZIBfEkbwhGy
| ZvkAoKAsHLKb4sYDNP+kd3buSlenErhb
| =wcLt
| -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|