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

Define a protocol / conventions for discovery #64

Open
oliverchang opened this issue Jul 11, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

Define a protocol / conventions for discovery #64

oliverchang opened this issue Jul 11, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@oliverchang
Copy link
Contributor

oliverchang commented Jul 11, 2022

Currently, the way to discover / determine OSV producers is to look at the README.md in this repo.

There should be a more well defined way to do this.

@joshbuker
Copy link
Contributor

Relates to #51, which would allow this type of discovery/determination when looking at individual IDs / entries.

What the schema_format field wouldn't cover is some sort of organic list of the various DBs using OSV. I would love to see a comprehensive list of all the databases out there, and that might be something the GSD project helps put together as we start looking at ingesting said DBs into their respective namespaces in the GSD. With that list, it should be simple to add an additional field to track what format(s) they use/support.

@kurtseifried
Copy link
Contributor

This speaks to having an identifier in the JSON format like CVE does. Then you could trivially:

  • search github for
    "data_type": "OSV",
  • check if a JSON file is in OSV format trivially
  • also ideally we wand out GSD's so easily that people just use us and we don't have to go looking

Do we have any data on producers of OSV data that aren't already well known?

@kurtseifried
Copy link
Contributor

bump: @oliverchang can we please add a

"data_type": "OSV",

like CVE has:

"data_type": "CVE"

and if not why not?

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants