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

Add unmaintained advisory for syslog crate #1672

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

bheylin
Copy link

@bheylin bheylin commented Apr 1, 2023

The syslog crate is no longer maintained by it's current owner.

The PR referenced in the advisory has had no response for a year a three months.
I tried to contact the owner through Github and the email associated with their Github account.

Copy link
Contributor

@pinkforest pinkforest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please see comment - this needs more detail.

Comment on lines +13 to +16
# The syslog crate is no longer maintained by it's current owner.
#
# The PR referenced above has had no response for a year a three months.
# I tried to contact the owner through Github and the email associated with their Github account.
Copy link
Contributor

@pinkforest pinkforest Apr 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please can we use formatting / fill the necessary detail accordingly per this example:
https://github.com/rustsec/advisory-db/blob/main/crates/buf_redux/RUSTSEC-2023-0028.md

Other than that don't see why this advisory should get merged as of now - it should also be actionable.

Our unmaintained advisories are reserved for completely unreachable maintainers and I don't see the necessary explicit communication that would support / merit flagging an advisory.

The maintainer seems very active and I don't see that maintainer would not merge security fixes if any.

@Geal just wondering if it would be worthwhile to nudge people to use other implementations ? Personally I don't see big reason to flag warning but just in case you would feel a gentle note would be warranted from your maintainer PoV that this crate may be deprecated possibly and you would be happy for people to not use the crate ?

Re; alternatives there seems another syslog implementation by name of syslog-rs but I'm not going to paint any alternatives at this stage since the maintainer hasn't had the word out.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

well that was a rude way to get my attention 😁
That crate is not unmaintained, it's just that as a very thin wrapper over syslog, it does not warrant a lot of releases (it's mostly 1 per year by now), unless there are serious issues or vulnerabilities, and that PR was neither.
@bheylin I'll get to it, chill a bit.

Copy link
Author

@bheylin bheylin Apr 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@pinkforest I thought that a year plus response time on a PR would warrant a crate as unmaintained.
But fair enough, you use a stricter definition of unmaintained.

@Geal apologies for my rudeness. I understand that syslog doesn't warrant a lot of releases.
But it's a shame that I can't use the crate on FreeBSD.

Thanks for your time all

@pinkforest pinkforest added Unmaintained Informational / Unmaintained Waiting-Maintainer Waiting-Maintainer Feedback Needs more feedback Waiting-Author Waiting on Author labels Apr 6, 2023
@pinkforest pinkforest closed this Apr 6, 2023
@pinkforest pinkforest removed Unmaintained Informational / Unmaintained Waiting-Author Waiting on Author Waiting-Maintainer Waiting-Maintainer Feedback Needs more feedback labels Apr 6, 2023
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