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 support for reading attached SBOMs to an image in cosign format #519

Open
sambhav opened this issue Dec 5, 2021 · 6 comments
Open
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@sambhav
Copy link
Contributor

sambhav commented Dec 5, 2021

What would you like to be added:

cosign is a popular image signing tool that also has a well-spec'd way of attaching SBOMs to an output image. Grype should take this information into account when an image is given as input and if the cosign attached SBOM contains grype compatible SBOM formats, it should try and use those for scanning.

Why is this needed:

This allows users to attach an SBOM to an image before hand in a consistent fashion.

Additional context:

Cosign will also add syft sbom support soon - sigstore/cosign#1137

@sambhav sambhav added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 5, 2021
@developer-guy
Copy link
Contributor

I'm so impressed and jealous 🤩 please let me know if I can help about anything 🙋🏻‍♂️

@luhring
Copy link
Contributor

luhring commented Dec 6, 2021

I like this! We had talked about something similar for if there were SBOM attestations available for the specified image. But attachments are good, too. @developer-guy feel free to take a stab at it — want me to assign you? 😎

@luhring
Copy link
Contributor

luhring commented Dec 6, 2021

I'd think we'd ultimately want to support all 3 of the SBOM formats:

@sambhav
Copy link
Contributor Author

sambhav commented Dec 6, 2021

Happy to help as well :)

@luhring
Copy link
Contributor

luhring commented Dec 6, 2021

@samj1912 That'd be great! 🙏

@spiffcs spiffcs added this to OSS Jun 1, 2022
@spiffcs spiffcs moved this to Triage (Comments or Progress Made) in OSS Jun 1, 2022
@tgerla tgerla removed the status in OSS Jan 26, 2023
@kzantow kzantow moved this to Backlog in OSS Jan 26, 2023
@kzantow
Copy link
Contributor

kzantow commented Jan 26, 2023

Let's make sure we are on the right path when this is picked up -- there are quite a few ways to implement this, and we'd like to make sure that the community can understand exactly what is going on with these SBOMs.

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
Status: Backlog
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants