MozCamp Asia recap
- Great success all round
- Smaller than Berlin from what I've heard, but lots of interactions nonetheless
- Gary's talk, "Fuzzing at Mozilla", was a success too
- About 10-15 attended, ppl from China, Taiwan, Malaysia attended
- Questions included:
- Number of fuzzing machines
- How do we restart the binaries after they have crashed
- Call for help made
- MDN articles?
- http://developer.mozilla.org/en/Security is sparse
- For example, we should have MDN articles about fuzzing
- suggested schedule
- 1 Monday Mtg/mo
- 1 Brownbag/mo
- can be us but can also be outside speakers, need help for ideas and how to approach
- is there a budget, e.g. for providing food, or travel for speakers? -> case by case basis
- [Jesse] I'd rather see more blog posts. They're more inclusive and provide better avenues for feedback. Talking at the Monday meeting just bores people.
- [imelven] +1 to blog posts
- [curtisk] if blog then these should be on our official blog - good point
- "hack of the month"
- discuss the hack, the failure, how to avoid
- Ian could talk/write about the “team embedding” thing
- [decoder] Post puzzles/riddles for readers to solve`
- [action item curtisk]
- get hack of the month in Dec for Jan
- get puzzle by EOM Dec -> publish 1st week Jan
- work with imelven on lightening talk
- get list of possible sec blog topics be EOM Dec
- We're quieter than Microsoft and Google because we're behind on security features. Blogging more is not the solution to that problem.
- final update is out
- discuss visualizations
- bar seems like the best representation
- find a way to represent as days of risk (person days of work)
Feedback from Johnath re: Sec Reviews
- Improving the process
- we want to maximize outcomes where actionable items are produced
- can we have more teams fill out the sec review template independent of whether we call a review meeting?
- We should try the questionnaire method that was mentioned by mcoates at the last joint meeting
- Assumptions about the underlying security model and data flow models etc. could be gathered ahead of the meeting to give a better direction where the meeting should go
- Could be done conditionally (based on template)
- Could be assisted by someone from secteam ahead of meeting
- Might save meeting time. If we know e.g. what the security model is and where the feature is located etc. then we don't need to ask these questions again.
- we probably need to maintain better "discipline" about staying on-task during the meetings
- In particular, avoid questioning the value of the feature (at least until we're done quantifying risk)
- stuff to cover while out
- release criteria