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

5.1.0 format has inconsistent timestamp, wrong description, and lacks string format #314

Open
ostefano opened this issue May 22, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working section:dates Schema location is dates

Comments

@ostefano
Copy link

ostefano commented May 22, 2024

In the just released 5.1 schema, field timestamp is type string with an unspecified format (while 5.0 had format date-time). Is there a reason for this?

Also, timestamp description is actually wrong:

Date/time format based on RFC3339 and ISO ISO8601, with an optional timezone in the format 'yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ss[+-]ZH:ZM'

While the regex (and actual timestamp values, see here for example https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/09b7c787c45c0193ce24c1fdcb98930c562741ef/cves/2024/31xxx/CVE-2024-31340.json) matches another format: yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:ss with optional Z or Z[+-]HH:mm (regex (Z|[+-][0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2})?).

@ostefano ostefano changed the title 5.1 format has inconsistent timestamp, wrong description, and lacks string format 5.1.0 format has inconsistent timestamp, wrong description, and lacks string format May 22, 2024
@jayjacobs jayjacobs added the bug Something isn't working label Oct 18, 2024
@ccoffin ccoffin added the section:dates Schema location is dates label Jan 10, 2025
@jayjacobs
Copy link
Collaborator

Related to CVEProject/automation-working-group#135
CVEProject/cve-services#1274 and
#353

I assume this issue would be fixed when the above issues are resolved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working section:dates Schema location is dates
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants