THE SPDX WIKI IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. ALL CONTENT HAS BEEN MOVED TO https://github.com/spdx

Difference between revisions of "Technical Team/Use Cases/2.0/Backtrack from binary to source files"

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Convert to MediaWiki syntax)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
−
<p>As an <a href="../stakeholders#auditor">auditor</a> in order to be certain that the licensing and provenance information regarding a binary, or compiled, file is correct i want a manifest of the files used to create it.</p><h3>Stakeholders and interests</h3><ul><li><strong><strong>Auditor<strong></strong></strong></strong><p>The person or organization performing an audit on the licensing and provenance information of a package.</p></li><li><strong>Project maintainer</strong><p>The person pr organization which maintains the open source software in question.</p></li><li><strong>Developer</strong><p>The person or organization using the software package provided by Project maintainer.</p></li></ul><h3>Main Scenario</h3><ol><li>Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.</li><li>Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.</li><li>Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.</li><li>Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.</li><li>Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.</li><li>Auditor uses the built from file list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular files and specific versions of those files.</li><li>Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed</li><li>Auditor provides clean bill of health</li></ol><h3>Alternate Scenario A</h3><ol><li>Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.</li><li>Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.</li><li>Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.</li><li>Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.</li><li>Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.</li><li>Auditor uses the built from package list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular packages and specific versions of those packages.</li><li>Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed</li><li>Auditor provides clean bill of health</li></ol><p><strong>NOTES: on 2012-10-02 having difficulty understanding the distinction between Main Scenario and Alternate A. &nbsp;versions of files vs. versions of Packages? (step 6)</strong></p>
+
As an [http://spdx.org/stakeholders#auditor auditor] in order to be certain that the licensing and provenance information regarding a binary, or compiled, file is correct i want a manifest of the files used to create it.
 +
 
 +
==Stakeholders and interests==
 +
 
 +
* '''Auditor:''' The person or organization performing an audit on the licensing and provenance information of a package.
 +
* '''Project maintainer:''' The person pr organization which maintains the open source software in question.
 +
* '''Developer:''' The person or organization using the software package provided by Project maintainer.
 +
 
 +
==Main Scenario==
 +
 
 +
# Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.
 +
# Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.
 +
# Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.
 +
# Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.
 +
# Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.
 +
# Auditor uses the built from file list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular files and specific versions of those files.
 +
# Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed
 +
# Auditor provides clean bill of health
 +
 
 +
==Alternate Scenario A==
 +
 
 +
# Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.
 +
# Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.
 +
# Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.
 +
# Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.
 +
# Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.
 +
# Auditor uses the built from package list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular packages and specific versions of those packages.
 +
# Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed
 +
# Auditor provides clean bill of health
 +
 
 +
'''NOTES: on 2012-10-02 having difficulty understanding the distinction between Main Scenario and Alternate A. versions of files vs. versions of Packages? (step 6)'''
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Technical]]

Latest revision as of 13:23, 7 March 2013

As an auditor in order to be certain that the licensing and provenance information regarding a binary, or compiled, file is correct i want a manifest of the files used to create it.

Stakeholders and interests

  • Auditor: The person or organization performing an audit on the licensing and provenance information of a package.
  • Project maintainer: The person pr organization which maintains the open source software in question.
  • Developer: The person or organization using the software package provided by Project maintainer.

Main Scenario

  1. Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.
  2. Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.
  3. Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.
  4. Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.
  5. Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.
  6. Auditor uses the built from file list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular files and specific versions of those files.
  7. Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed
  8. Auditor provides clean bill of health

Alternate Scenario A

  1. Project maintainer builds binary files keeping track of which source files are included in the binary.
  2. Project maintainer publishes package with SPDX that provides references to every source used to create each compiled file in the package.
  3. Developer downloads binary/compiled package from Package maintainer.
  4. Developer requests audit of code base before shipping.
  5. Auditor wants to verify that provided licensing and provenance info for compiled files are actually what the provided SPDX file claims.
  6. Auditor uses the built from package list for the compiled file to narrow the analysis to particular packages and specific versions of those packages.
  7. Auditor performs deep analysis to ensure the that the licensing and provenance of the files are indeed as claimed
  8. Auditor provides clean bill of health

NOTES: on 2012-10-02 having difficulty understanding the distinction between Main Scenario and Alternate A. versions of files vs. versions of Packages? (step 6)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?title=Technical_Team/Use_Cases/2.0/Backtrack_from_binary_to_source_files&oldid=1973"