Repository (non-Global) Security Advisories have major usability challenges #181073
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
💬 Your Product Feedback Has Been Submitted 🎉 Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us! Your feedback is invaluable as we build a better GitHub experience for all our users. Here's what you can expect moving forward ⏩
Where to look to see what's shipping 👀
What you can do in the meantime 💻
As a member of the GitHub community, your participation is essential. While we can't promise that every suggestion will be implemented, we want to emphasize that your feedback is instrumental in guiding our decisions and priorities. Thank you once again for your contribution to making GitHub even better! We're grateful for your ongoing support and collaboration in shaping the future of our platform. ⭐ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Select Topic Area
Product Feedback
Body
The distinction between repository and global security advisories is confusing and problematic. It breaks the GHSA identifier. Specifically:
urlor repository. The data between these two identically-identified advisories are almost always different. (This is issue GHSA-qq97-vm5h-rrhg out-of sync. Why does it have different states? github/advisory-database#224)urlor repository.aliasinformation.There are two simple APIs that would greatly alleviate many of the pains that come from this muddled situation:
Fundamentally, though, it seems quite ironic to have built such a well-designed unique identifier only to intentionally break its uniqueness. The advisory ecosystem is well-versed with
aliased IDs. GitHub's advisory db would be very well served if it could detangle the global and repository IDs, using distinct identifiers (or even distinct prefixes!) that reference each-other with aliases instead.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions