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

feat: initial poc for report #372

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from
Closed

feat: initial poc for report #372

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

CloudBeard
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

Initial POC for report command. Currently only reports controls from component definition. Outputs json by default but also supports yaml. Support the ability to create output file if needed and stdout. This allows for broader use of the report but also ability to send JSON/YAML into a processor for visualization.

Currently can create a detailed and/or summary report based on needs.

Related Issue

Relates to #223 and #247

Type of change

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Other (security config, docs update, etc)

Checklist before merging

Copy link

netlify bot commented Apr 16, 2024

Deploy Preview for lula-docs canceled.

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 340e984
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/lula-docs/deploys/661ecf47bc6c5d0008254be4

@CloudBeard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Still need to add functionality for grabbing all controls from source profile to get a percentage mapped.

All other report types SSP/SAP/SAR would be added once we have those to pull data from.

Still need to add tests.

@brandtkeller
Copy link
Member

For posterity - we had discussed this being blocked/dependent on the generation work.

After re-review, I believe that is short-sighted on my part. While not untrue for the code - I think there is more that we could be doing to effectively identify the problem.

I appreciate what you have done here - I think what we lack currently is what the intent of Lula Reporting really entails. You have created some flexibility wherein we can report on different models or targets - which may very well be a part of what we need.

To make this more actionable - I believe we need a higher-level picture of what is valuable and that we want to accomplish with the lula report. Possibly a design session to brainstorm and create agreement on direction? Open to thoughts and feedback.

@CloudBeard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree on the design session, I didn't want to get too in-depth with what is being reported and how its gotten. How much is by default, do we go with a detailed/summary, do we go with a way to add more or remove from those.

I can see the need to provide tons of details. How many controls total, how many in X family, tech vs admin, new term portable vs non-portable (if you piece mill it or use another CSP what do you lose/keep), various frameworks/ILs, how many are validated, how many failed, and tons of correlations of each of these.

All of that for every layer component definition, SSP, SAP/SAR, POAM

Figuring out what is the most important to start with and what is needed to do it. I think Daniel will have a lot of awesome insights on what could be initially needed to show.

I only think its "blocked" in the sense we just need a working OSCAL with some example data of each to report against. I believe we could run it along side generate functionality. Possibly use report to test the correctness of generate's output.

@brandtkeller
Copy link
Member

@CloudBeard Do we still need this Draft given #599 ?

@CloudBeard
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@CloudBeard Do we still need this Draft given #599 ?

Nope ill close this one. I used a mix of your draft and this draft to get started.

@CloudBeard CloudBeard closed this Sep 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: No status
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants