Re: Working Group Participants Question

[Kurt Seifried <kurt@seifried.org>]

Yeah that would definitely solve that problem mostly. I think it still might be a good idea also for context for other people joining the group. 

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Scott Lawler <scott.lawler@lp3.com> wrote:

Kurt,

If they are “by invitation only” from existing members or CNAs, does that address your concern?

 

Working groups are meant to be temporary as well so I’m not sure how much of an issue this will be.

 

I welcome your thoughts.  

 

Thank you,  

Scott

Scott.Lawler@LP3.com

703-509-9330

 

From: Kurt Seifried <kseifried@redhat.com>
Date: Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 11:11 AM
To: "Coffin, Chris" <ccoffin@mitre.org>
Cc: CVE Editorial Board Discussion <cve-editorial-board-list@mitre.org>
Subject: Re: Working Group Participants Question

 

Maybe simply have people show at least one good reason as to why they should participate? I'd worry that people may join these things to try and pad their resumés. It doesn't have to be anything amazing, "My company uses CVE a lot for our software we produce" or "We're a security firm and care about consuming CVE". 

 

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 9:05 AM, Coffin, Chris <ccoffin@mitre.org> wrote:

CVE Board Members,

 

In the last two Board meetings there was discussion about whether language was needed in the Board charter (or working group charters) to state specifically who can and cannot participate in the working groups. My recollection is that when the first WGs were created, the intent was for the WGs to be open to anyone in the community who showed interest, and not just Board members or CNAs. The question being proposed here is in regards to whether a charter update is needed to include this language. As it stands today, the Board charter (and working group charters) do not address who can or cannot participate.

 

Board members present during the 4/25 conference call felt that we could move forward with the prior intent without an update to the charters. If you feel differently and believe that this language should be added to the charter or charters now, please reply with your reasons or concerns before the end of the day on Friday 5/4.

 

Regards,

 

Chris

 

--

Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud
PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert@redhat.com

--

Kurt Seifried
kurt@seifried.org