Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

A few tests suggestions to see if I'm on the right track #321

Open
wants to merge 20 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shoffman-percona
Copy link

Lori Larusso mentioned you were looking for help building out the criteria for the CCC project. We happen to have pretty deep expertise in the DB realm so I can certainly contribute more items along these lines but before I went to far I figured I'd do just a few to get feedback.

If there's a particular area you'd like focus on, please just let me know!

@shoffman-percona shoffman-percona requested a review from a team as a code owner August 26, 2024 20:54
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Aug 26, 2024

CLA Missing ID CLA Not Signed

@eddie-knight
Copy link
Contributor

eddie-knight commented Aug 27, 2024

Hey @shoffman-percona, thanks for this PR!

Damien and Michael are approvers for this domain, but I'd like to help from a steering perspective. It occurred to me while reviewing your changes that the best place to invest time may be the threat or control definitions themselves. The current progress on the RDMS entry is iterative, and I expect it needs strong revisions before we can create accurate behaviors/steps.

Would you like to contribute to the RDMS threat or control definition refinement?

I don't mind spending a cycle to help create runway here, if you're interested in picking it up!

@shoffman-percona
Copy link
Author

@eddie-knight, Absolutely...I just started where Lori pointed me but let me comb through the threats materials. I assume this is where you'd want some help building out?

It may end up being a 1:x mapping of threats to controls so likely will end up coming up with them together.

@eddie-knight
Copy link
Contributor

Yes! Although the RDMS iteration is in need of an update to match the finalized guidelines (yaml).

Feel free to drop me an email ([email protected]) or message me on the FINOS slack if I can help with implementation details.

services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@CCC.RDMS.C8.TR01.T02
Scenario: Ensure ability to audit for any users who have connected using an insecure protocol
Given a user connection has been established to the database
When an admin establishes an admin connection to a database server and runs from mysql.user where ssl_type=''
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For our controls, we try to keep them as abstract as possible. we should remove the mysql.user where ssl_type='' from this statement.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense! If I'm otherwise on track, I'll push a few more over in addition to threats/controls.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also remember to keep an eye on the new ID format. Most notably the Ts... threats are now TH00, Test requirements are TR00 and Tests are TE00

services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@CCC.RDMS.C8.TR01.T02
Scenario: Ensure ability to audit for any users who have connected using an insecure protocol
Given a user connection has been established to the database
When an admin establishes an admin connection to a database server and runs from mysql.user where ssl_type=''
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also remember to keep an eye on the new ID format. Most notably the Ts... threats are now TH00, Test requirements are TR00 and Tests are TE00

@shoffman-percona shoffman-percona requested a review from a team as a code owner August 29, 2024 18:22
@shoffman-percona
Copy link
Author

shoffman-percona commented Aug 29, 2024

Ok, accepted proposed changes, reworked the one that was too technology specific and also converted threats.md to threats.yaml. hopefully this is in acceptable form (just let me know if it's not) and I'll start adding threats and converting controls.md @eddie-knight @damienjburks

Copy link
Contributor

@eddie-knight eddie-knight left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added some comments that I hope help accelerate your progress.

Happy to help contribute to the gherkin writing, perhaps in something like google docs so that we can have faster iterations— these things are hard to get right!

services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c2.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c8.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
services/database/relational/tests/ccc-rdms-c8.feature Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
title: Relational Database Management Systems Threats
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated to the new schema although I left description at the highest level as it made sense to keep to me. No worries if it gets dropped.

@shoffman-percona
Copy link
Author

Google would be easier to co-edit but staying in the repo is helping me learn where all the relevant docs are located. I was guessing a bit earlier but now and seeing how to find definitions and templates and such.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants