Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
History is littered with hundreds of conflicts over the future of a community, group, location or business that were "resolved" when one of the parties stepped ahead and destroyed what was there. With the original point of contention destroyed, the debates would fall to the wayside. Archive Team believes that by duplicated condemned data, the conversation and debate can continue, as well as the richness and insight gained by keeping the materials. Our projects have ranged in size from a single volunteer downloading the data to a small-but-critical site, to over 100 volunteers stepping forward to acquire terabytes of user-created data to save for future generations.
The main site for Archive Team is at archiveteam.org and contains up to the date information on various projects, manifestos, plans and walkthroughs.
This collection contains the output of many Archive Team projects, both ongoing and completed. Thanks to the generous providing of disk space by the Internet Archive, multi-terabyte datasets can be made available, as well as in use by the Wayback Machine, providing a path back to lost websites and work.
Our collection has grown to the point of having sub-collections for the type of data we acquire. If you are seeking to browse the contents of these collections, the Wayback Machine is the best first stop. Otherwise, you are free to dig into the stacks to see what you may find.
The Archive Team Panic Downloads are full pulldowns of currently extant websites, meant to serve as emergency backups for needed sites that are in danger of closing, or which will be missed dearly if suddenly lost due to hard drive crashes or server failures.
ArchiveBot is an IRC bot designed to automate the archival of smaller websites (e.g. up to a few hundred thousand URLs). You give it a URL to start at, and it grabs all content under that URL, records it in a WARC, and then uploads that WARC to ArchiveTeam servers for eventual injection into the Internet Archive (or other archive sites).
To use ArchiveBot, drop by #archivebot on EFNet. To interact with ArchiveBot, you issue commands by typing it into the channel. Note you will need channel operator permissions in order to issue archiving jobs. The dashboard shows the sites being downloaded currently.
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20250726073140/https://github.blog/security/vulnerability-research/how-to-request-a-change-to-a-cve-record/
CVE IDs are a widely-used system for tracking software vulnerabilities. When a vulnerable dependency affects your software, you can create a repository security advisory to alert others. But if you want your insight to reach the most upstream data source possible, you’ll need to contact the CVE Numbering Authority (CNA) that issued the vulnerability’s CVE ID.
GitHub, as part of a community of over 400 CNAs, can help in cases when GitHub issued the CVE (such as with this community contribution). And with just a few key details, you can identify the right CNA and reach out with the necessary context. This guide shows you how.
Every CVE record contains an entry that includes the name of the CNA that issued the CVE ID. The CNA is responsible for updating the CVE record after its initial publication, so any requests should be directed to them.
On cve.org, the CNA is listed as the first piece of information under the “Required CVE Record Information” header. The information is also available on the right side of the page.
On nvd.nist.gov, information about the issuing CNA is available in the “QUICK INFO” box. The issuing CNA is called “Source”.
After identifying the CNA from the CVE record, locate their official contact information to request updates or changes. That information is available on the CNA partners website at https://www.cve.org/PartnerInformation/ListofPartners.
Search for the CNA’s name in the search bar. Some organizations may have more than one CNA, so make sure that the CVE you want corresponds to the correct CNA.
The left column, under “Partner,” has the name of the CNA that links to a profile page with its scope and contact information.
Most CNAs have an email address for CVE-related communications. Click the link under “Step 2: Contact” that says Email to find the CNA’s email address.
The most notable exception to the general preference for email communication among CNAs is the MITRE Corporation, the world’s most prolific CVE Numbering Authority. MITRE uses a webform at https://cveform.mitre.org/ for submitting requests to create, update, dispute, or reject CVEs.
The information you want to add, remove, or change within the CVE record
Why you want to change the information
Supporting evidence, usually in the form of a reference link
Including publicly available reference links is important, as they justify the changes. Examples of reference links include:
A publicly available vulnerability report, advisory, or proof-of-concept
A fix commit or release notes that describe a patch
An issue in the affected repository in which the maintainer discusses the vulnerability in their software with the community
A community contribution pull request that suggests a change to the CVE’s corresponding GitHub Security Advisory
When submitting changes, keep in mind that the CNA isn’t your only audience. Clear context around disclosure decisions and vulnerability details helps the broader developer and security community understand the risks and make informed decisions about mitigation.
“3.2.4.1 Subject to their respective CNA Scope Definitions, CNAs MUST respond in a timely manner to CVE ID assignment requests submitted through the CNA’s public POC.
3.2.4.2 CNAs SHOULD document their expected response times, including those for the public POC.”
The CNA rules establish firm timelines for assignment of CVE IDs to vulnerabilities that are already public knowledge. For CVE ID assignment or record publication in particular, section 4.2 and section 4.5 of the CVE CNA rules establish 72 hours as the time limit in which CNAs should issue CVE IDs or publish CVE records for publicly-known vulnerabilities. However, no such guidance exists for changing a CVE record.
If the CNA doesn’t respond or you cannot reach an agreement about the content of the CVE record, the next step is to engage in the dispute process.
The CVE Program Policy and Procedure for Disputing a CVE Record provides details on how you may go about disputing a CVE record and escalating a dispute. The details of that process are beyond the scope of this post. However, if you end up disputing a CVE record, it’s good to know who the root or top-level root of the CNA is that reviews the dispute.
When viewing a CNA’s partner page linked from https://www.cve.org/PartnerInformation/ListofPartners, you can find the CNA’s root under the column “Top-Level Root.” For most CNAs, their root is the Top-Level Root, MITRE.
Security Analyst, curator of the GitHub Advisory Database, and one of the members of the Security Lab responsible for issuing CVE IDs and publishing CVE records.
Open source software is critical infrastructure, but it’s underfunded. With a new feasibility study, GitHub’s developer policy team is building a coalition of policymakers and industry to close the maintenance funding gap.
That idea you’ve been sitting on? The domain you bought at 2AM? A silly or serious side project? This summer, we invite you to build it — for the joy, for the vibes, For the Love of Code 🧡
We do newsletters, too
Discover tips, technical guides, and best practices in our biweekly newsletter just for devs.
✕
Wait! Don't Go Yet 🚀
Get our FREE eBook "10 Programming Tips That Changed Everything" when you subscribe!