Open source is where A.5.32 bites hardest. MIT and Apache-2.0 impose notice and attribution duties. GPLv2 and GPLv3 trigger on distribution, so internal use alone does not. AGPLv3 extends the trigger to users interacting over a network.
#ISO27001#OpenSource#SBOM
I think we're going to talk less about:
"Do you have an SBOM?"
and more about:
"Can you maintain an accurate SBOM across the entire product lifecycle?"
Generate → release → update → vulnerability → remediation → new release.
The lifecycle is the hard part.
#sbom#eucra
CRA compliance shouldn't start with a checklist.
It should start with a question:
Can we explain the security state of every product we have shipped?
If the answer is no, adding another compliance document won't fix the underlying problem.
#sbom#cra#eucra
Hot take:
Generating an SBOM is becoming a commodity.
The harder problems are:
→ keeping it connected to product versions
→ mapping vulnerabilities to releases
→ knowing what needs remediation
→ keeping the evidence
That's where SBOM becomes Product Security.
#SBOM#EUCRA
Do you really know what’s inside your products?
ONEKEY enables SBOM transparency, vulnerability management and continuous monitoring in one platform.
Discover more at it-sa, booth 9-346: onekey.com/resource/meet-one…#SBOM#Cybersecurity#ONEKEY
package.json says ^4.17.0. The build shipped one exact version, and only that one matches an advisory. If your SBOM was built from the manifest, it describes an intent, not an artifact. offensive360.com/software-su…#SCA#SBOM
Software-Stücklisten (SBOM) sind ein Schlüssel zur CRA-Compliance. Sie schaffen Transparenz über Softwarekomponenten, erleichtern das Schwachstellenmanagement und helfen, Sicherheitsrisiken frühzeitig zu erkennen.
datensicherheit.de/eu-cra-sb…#CRA#SBOM#Cybersecurity