-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 111
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
feat(mitre): add new datasource: mitre #392
Conversation
56ec478
to
9226db0
Compare
9226db0
to
867f0ed
Compare
46146ad
to
638ba0c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fantastic!
It will probably breaks my workflow at first, but it looks really interesting! Thanks. 👍 |
I gave it a try, some feedback using CVE-2024-36971 as an example. It is a Linux kernel CVE. Here it is, as from the CNA itself on the linux-cve-announce.vger.kernel.org mailing list, with lots of details: Using go-cve-dictionary master 73f1570, I have some info from Mitre, but not these details. I can think of a few possible reasons for this: This is a misunderstanding from me, as this could be a first needed step before possible future development. For example, as of today, CVE.org announced the availability of CVE Record Format Version 5.1.0 (https://www.cve.org/Media/News/item/blog/2024/05/09/CVE-Record-Format-CVE-Services-Updated), while this go-cve-dictionary development is linked to #287, for format 5.0 To add to the confusion, https://cveawg.mitre.org/api/cve/CVE-2024-0564 clearly indicates (And of course, the NVD and CVE ecosystem chaos that does not help, for sure.) |
@jbmaillet |
When I mention version 5.0 or version 5.1, I mean the version of the CVE record format, also known as "the CVE JSON format". It has no relationship with the affected product version, which is very difficult to do (if possible as of today) from MITRE / CVE.org information since they do not use formal CPE. On CVE-2024-36971 in my example above I taught it was missing, but you noticed it is at the bottom of the JSON here: But I can see that these data are not present in a go-cve-dictionary database: ...the list of affected files: ...the list of affected versions, though we do not have CPE, we have much better data quality than a CPE: ...the DataType is missing as well while it should be "CVE_RECORD": All this is missing from my go-cve-dictionary database using NVD + JVN + MITRE. My question: are these data missing because your work is about CVE Record format version 5.0, not yet 5.1? |
Clarification regarding my question above in #395 |
If this Pull Request is work in progress, Add a prefix of “[WIP]” in the title.
What did you implement:
Fixes #287, #351
Type of change
How Has This Been Tested?
Checklist:
You don't have to satisfy all of the following.
make fmt
make test
Is this ready for review?: YES
Reference