From MozillaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

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

Security Interaction

  • MDN articles?
  • 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.

Security Stats

  • 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)

Lucas PTO

  • stuff to cover while out
    • release criteria
    • Tanvi


Recent Security Reviews

Add-On Sync Remote Debug Android Sync