Skip to content

add property cdx:reproducible - #70

Merged
jkowalleck merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
cdx-reproducible
Aug 20, 2023
Merged

add property cdx:reproducible#70
jkowalleck merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
cdx-reproducible

Conversation

@jkowalleck

@jkowalleck jkowalleck commented Aug 13, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Purpose: flag a SBOM document or parts of it as reproducible.
reproducible SBOMs usually omit time-and random-based information, and might render elements in a reproducible order.

some implementations that can generate “reproducible” BOMs, by omitting time- and random-based values, ordering elements, and so on already exist.

caused by #69 (comment)

@jkowalleck jkowalleck added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 13, 2023
@jkowalleck
jkowalleck requested a review from a team as a code owner August 13, 2023 07:50
@jkowalleck jkowalleck changed the title property cdx:reproducible add property cdx:reproducible Aug 13, 2023
Comment thread cdx.md Outdated
hboutemy added a commit to hboutemy/cyclonedx-property-taxonomy that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2023
Signed-off-by: Hervé Boutemy <hboutemy@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Jan Kowalleck <jan.kowalleck@gmail.com>
@jkowalleck

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@stevespringett could I get your opinion on this proposed property?

Comment thread cdx.md

| Property | Description |
| -------- | ----------- |
| `cdx:reproducible` | Whether the CycloneDX document has been generated in a reproducible manner: if so, then time- or random-based values MUST be omitted, and elements order SHOULD be reproducible. _Boolean value_. May appear once. |

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What about using SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH for time information?

@jkowalleck jkowalleck Aug 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what about it?
all build-time information that is related to time is optional in CycloneDX, so just omit it.

If you going to fake/pretend timestamps, then why bother making the document as "reproducible"?

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The idea of it is to say "the date is when the source artifact was made/published/whatever". I suppose just omitting it here is fine, but not having to scrounge for some date information elsewhere would be useful I expect…

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

could you open a new issue for the topic, so we could discuss further?
please describe why you need the timestamp, for what you use it, and what you want to artificially base it of, and what role the "reproducible" flag plays in all that.

hboutemy added a commit to CycloneDX/cyclonedx-maven-plugin that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2023
property introduced in CycloneDX/cyclonedx-property-taxonomy#70

Signed-off-by: Hervé Boutemy <hboutemy@apache.org>
hboutemy added a commit to CycloneDX/cyclonedx-maven-plugin that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2023
property introduced in CycloneDX/cyclonedx-property-taxonomy#70

Signed-off-by: Hervé Boutemy <hboutemy@apache.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants