Fix timestamps for data-stream composition

[ggbecker]

Description:

• Unify and use the constant timestamp across the whole code.

• Previously oscap info command would print null for such cases. Stream: scap_org.open-scap_datastream_from_xccdf_ssg-fedora-xccdf.xml Generated: (null)

Review Hints:

• oscap info "ds.file"

Previous:
~ 0 $ oscap info "/usr/share/xml/scap/ssg/content/ssg-fedora-ds.xml"
Document type: Source Data Stream
Imported: 2024-08-12T02:00:00

Stream: scap_org.open-scap_datastream_from_xccdf_ssg-fedora-xccdf.xml
Generated: (null)
Version: 1.3
Checklists:

Current:
oscap info build/ssg-rhel9-ds.xml
Document type: Source Data Stream
Imported: 2024-11-21T14:20:20

Stream: scap_org.open-scap_datastream_from_xccdf_ssg-rhel9-xccdf.xml
Generated: 2024-11-21T13:20:19
Version: 1.3
Checklists:

[github-actions]

Start a new ephemeral environment with changes proposed in this pull request:

Fedora Environment

Oracle Linux 8 Environment

[jan-cerny]

@ggbecker What do you think about the date attribute of the status element within the Benchmark element? I think this one should be changed as well because it depends on the current date. See build_yaml.py line 426.

[jan-cerny]

@ggbecker What is your opinion on the comment above?

[ggbecker]

@ggbecker What do you think about the date attribute of the status element within the Benchmark element? I think this one should be changed as well because it depends on the current date. See build_yaml.py line 426.

This got fixed in this commit: d561c6a

But I believe we could still use the timestamp variable there, the only thing I don't know is if the time format is a problem since the status is now being populated only by the day/month/year, opposed to the day/month/year + hh:mm:ss coming from the timestamp variable. What do you think?

[jan-cerny]

Yes, the format seems to be a problem, because the schema validation fails. The status element needs to contain date in a form of YYYY-DD-MM, for example: <xccdf-1.2:status date="2024-12-03">draft</xccdf-1.2:status>. But the date really needs to depend on the timestamp variable otherwise the build won't be reproducible. So I suggest writing some formatting code that takes the timestamp, creates the date in a proper format and inserts it into the status element.

[ggbecker]

Yes, the format seems to be a problem, because the schema validation fails. The status element needs to contain date in a form of YYYY-DD-MM, for example: <xccdf-1.2:status date="2024-12-03">draft</xccdf-1.2:status>. But the date really needs to depend on the timestamp variable otherwise the build won't be reproducible. So I suggest writing some formatting code that takes the timestamp, creates the date in a proper format and inserts it into the status element.

It should be now resolved, let's see how the CI goes.

[codeclimate]

Code Climate has analyzed commit ca6a49d and detected 0 issues on this pull request.

The test coverage on the diff in this pull request is 66.6% (50% is the threshold).

This pull request will bring the total coverage in the repository to 61.9% (0.0% change).

View more on Code Climate.

[jan-cerny]

I have reviewed the timestamp attributes in the built data stream both in with and without the SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH variable.