[21:56] <amahajan> Hello everyone!
[21:56] <amahajan> I hope you are doing well.
[21:56] <amahajan> I am trying to understand from what is the right source for consuming the OVAL feed for ubuntu vulnerability data.
[21:56] <amahajan> We use Quay Clair for scanning and it uses the feed from https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/oval/
[21:56] <amahajan>  (https://github.com/quay/claircore/blob/main/ubuntu/updater.go#L18-L21)
[21:56] <amahajan> This does not match the source mentioned on the Ubuntu OVAL page
[21:56] <amahajan> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/oval/HEADER.html
[21:56] <amahajan> What is the difference between these two sources?
[22:03] <sarnold> hrmph, I guess the redirect on https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/oval/ wasn't enough to redirect requests for the ovals themselves.. there's still files there, but they haven't been updated since november.
[22:19] <amahajan> Okay. So it seems the previous link should no longer be used.
[22:21] <sarnold> yeah; are you on the bug report, or shall I file it?
[22:22] <amahajan> I can. I am not sure which is the right place to file it though
[22:23] <sarnold> me neither, but if you click the three dots on the left side of the github link, that'll give a popup with a "reference in new issue" link that will probably do the right thing
[22:28] <amahajan> I can raise an issue for Clair. I am not sure how what the fix is for the old feed - people.canonical.com
[22:29] <amahajan> And where can I file it.
[22:29] <amahajan> I feel the data should be removed from the link so that customers consuming it start failing instead of assuming that the data represents the latest vulnerability feed.
[22:31] <sarnold> yeah, I did briefly think about just deleting them all :) before wondering what *that* would break.. heh
[22:32] <amahajan> Yeah. makes sense. but in this case - it may be better to let things break maybe. :)
[22:33] <sarnold> maybe
[23:08] <amahajan> Thank you for your reply!! It helped me understand some discrepancies I was observing.
[23:12] <sarnold> amahajan: thanks :) I hadn't realized we weren't generating these things for a few months, heh