[Nomination] Adding new Google representative to security group

[george.burgess.iv]

Summary

Hi!

I spoke offline with Matthew Riley, who recommended that I nominate myself to join the LLVM security group as a representative of Google. In particular, I intend to register as a vendor contact. I work primarily with toolchains and toolchain teams focused on our open source projects (e.g., Chrome, Chrome OS, Android, ...), and some security-critical parts of varying levels of open-source-ness under those banners. :)

We believe that adding myself as the second representative for Google will help improve the robustness of Google's response to any potential future security issues that the LLVM project may encounter.

Please let me know if I can provide any other information, or if I missed anything in this nomination.

Thank you for your time!

[mattdr]

I want to avoid being the first one to approve, given our mutual affiliation, but at least wanted to confirm the story: @george.burgess.iv will be a valuable contact given his existing LLVM affiliation and deep involvement with the deployment of LLVM toolchains across several Google products.

This also helps bring Google in line with what we should consider a best practice -- vendors with vested security interest should have multiple inbound contacts to avoid heroics or single points of failure.

[kristof.beyls]

I approve. Thanks George!

According to the rules in https://llvm.org/docs/Security.html, section "Choosing new members":

If a nomination for LLVM Security Group membership is supported by a majority of existing LLVM Security Group members, then it carries within five business days unless an existing member of the Security Group objects. If an objection is raised, the LLVM Security Group members should discuss the matter and try to come to consensus; failing this, the nomination will succeed only by a two-thirds supermajority vote of the LLVM Security Group.

So if I count correctly, that means we need 8 (out of 15) approvals, assuming no objections are raised.

[jfb]

I'm no longer in the security group, but (from the peanut gallery) I endorse Google having a second representative, and George in particular.

[dim]

Looks like a good idea to me.

[probinson]

Welcome to the ranks!

[peter.smith]

LGTM too.

[ab]

Thanks George, and welcome!

[george.burgess.iv]

Thank you all for your support!

It appears this now has the requisite 8 votes, so I assume this is safe to land. I plan to do so tomorrow, in order to give people a last window to raise any concerns. :)

llvm/docs/Security.rst

 
 The members of the group represent a wide cross-section of the community, and meet the criteria for inclusion below.
 
 * Ahmed Bougacha (Apple)
 * Akila Srinivasan (Apple)
 * Artur Pilipenko (Azul Systems Inc)
 * Dimitry Andric (individual; FreeBSD)
 * Ed Maste (individual; FreeBSD)
+* George Burgess IV (Google)
 * Josh Eads (Sony)
 * Kristof Beyls (ARM)
 * Matthew Riley (Google)
 * Oliver Hunt (Apple)
 * Paul Robinson (Sony)
 * Peter Smith (ARM)
 * Pietro Albini (individual; Rust)
 * Serge Guelton (RedHat)