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 missing audit events for metadata updates and verification status #3533

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

unmultimedio
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@unmultimedio unmultimedio requested a review from a team December 12, 2024 16:50
@unmultimedio unmultimedio requested a review from bufdev as a code owner December 12, 2024 16:50
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2024

The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Buf CI / buf (pull_request).

BuildFormatLintBreakingUpdated (UTC)
✅ passed✅ passed✅ passed✅ passedDec 12, 2024, 9:01 PM

Comment on lines +240 to +245
message PayloadOrganizationVerificationStatusChanged {
// old_verification_status is the organization verification status before the update.
string old_verification_status = 1;
// new_verification_status is the organization verification status after the update.
string new_verification_status = 2;
}
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is in a similar spot like this other conversation, the definition of these verification statuses live in registry-proto here, so we don't have a way to reference the right value here.

The options I see are:

  1. Log the string value of that enum in registry-proto here; that doesn't feel right.
  2. Add an equivalent enum in this pkg, and a parser in the audit log writer that converts from that registry-proto's enum to the one in here; it's duplication of types but that doesn't sound too bad I think.
  3. Punt auditing this event until we move this pkg to be colocated in registry-proto.

This same scenario happens with PayloadUserVerificationStatusChanged.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could be wrong, but it feels like this over-indexes on "audit logging" everything available. Do users really care what user changed the description and to what?

Where do we draw the line on what we audit and not?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In general terms we're leaning on auditing any write operation. Even the original proposal was thinking how we could expand on read operations too, but we haven't gone that far yet.

This PR adds metadata (true it may be not super important, just URLs and descriptions), and verification status changes (they sound pretty important to me, and they're not being audited yet).

Let's chat about it.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

approving from my side but you both resolve this

@unmultimedio
Copy link
Member Author

Chatted internally with the team, closing this PR until/if we decide these events are worth auditing.

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