hi all, thanks for the interest/comments; I decided to write-up a page that details this on the docs.

http://inedo.com/support/documentation/proget/feeds/other-types

I'm hoping we can use this public thread to maintain the discussion on technical detail; otherwise it'll get stuck in my email, or somewhere else, and we can get everyone to chime in this way.

That said, @M-W if you've got any insight into how R/CRAN works please do share :)

Of course, plan versioning is introduced in a later version, and Rafts (which allow for Git-based storage) is coming in 6.2.

I definitely understand the hesitance to upgrade, but worth noting ---- for once 6.2 comes around we'll offer some great migration tactics to let you pull applications from really old versions of BuildMaster. We'll also better support multi-instances of BuildMaster, so each group can upgrade as they'd like.

That said, the Plans database table will contain your OtterScript plans. Not sure if that's a good solution, but pulling from that table will give you latest versions.

Hello;

There may have been a miscommunication somewhere; do you know specifically what you were told?

We recently added the Feeds Management API, but that's only to manage feeds (not packages).

I just updated the documentation, and it will be published soon.

You can delete (permanently remove) or unlist (hide from most search results) NuGet packages from your feed by navigating to the package page and clicking the corresponding Delete Package or Unlist Package button. These actions require the Feeds_DeletePackage or Feeds_UnlistPackage permission attribute, respectively.

To programmatically delete a package from your feed, you can use the NuGet CLI's delete command, or make a DELETE request via HTTP:

DELETE http://{proget-server}/nuget/{feed-name}/package/{ID}/{VERSION}`

Note that this behavior is different than NuGet.org's DELETE command, which unlists packages instead.

To programmatically unlist (or relist) a package, you can use the NuGetPackagesV2_SetListed method within the Native API.

Is that helpful?

Definitely sounds like a bug; we've get it logged.

By the way, we've got some real exciting container/registry features coming very soon in ProGet 5.3. Stay tuned!

Hi @jeff-miles_5073 ,

Thanks for the first inquiry; I just updated the documentation! These must be "relatively new", and I know we've had a few customers using universal packages for this.

We have some Terraform integrations on our roadmap for 2023, so this definitely something we'll look into on our own as well.

Cheers,
Alex

Just as an update, we will be doing this:

https://inedo.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/PG-1555

"Proxy npm audit requests to npmjs.org (experimental)"

Hi @shfunke_1795 , @jrottmann_6111

Thanks, I just added this to our documentation page!

I didn't look too deeply, but I found some initial documentation:
https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Package_management

It seems this is "like Yum/RPM but for Alpine Linux"? None of us here use Alpine Linux, so there's a pretty big learning curve to get started. Any help here would be appreciated, and definitely move this along :)

Is this related to "APK" that Android uses?

Is the "API" mostly like basic file downloads, based on an index file? Are you able to "hack" or do a PoC using ProGet Asset Directories?

Hi @tkolb_7784

I wanted to provide an official answer to this:

Are there plans for (easy) HTTPS support in the internal webserver? Applying a self hosted certificate and deploying it to all build servers and developer machines seems over the top for me right now.

Yes. Not exactly sure how yet, but we would like the integrated webserver to support this as easily as possible.

@shayde @sebastian really appreciate the help, we'll get this incorporated ASAP !!

Thanks for clarifying @sebastian

So I'm not exactly thrilled by this UI, but maybe this is fine.

What do you think?

This is a kind of "quick and dirty" page that would show up if you clicked on that GPL-2.0 license and the "# projects" number.

Here's one for the packages as well:

Hi @Nils-Nilsson ,

Thanks for the feedback; we discussed this with the team some more.

The use case makes a lot of sense, especially with risk profiles introduced in ProGet 2026. Instead of exposing Policies (which have a bunch of package-driven rules) and blocking, our thoughts are:

[1] Allow risk profile to be set/configured on Docker feeds; behind the scenes this would create Policy, but none of the rules would be used

[2] Allow scoped assessments on Docker feeds; this would also use the feed's policy

[3] Add pgutil containers audit command, which would display vulnerabilities and error if any are severe

The issue we have with "blocking" downloads directly is that the Docker/Kube/Podman/etc. do not expose HTTP error messages and this becomes very painful to debug/troubleshoot.

However, running pgutil containers audit can "break" any automation process (nonzero exit code) and will list all vulenrabilities etc.

LEt us know your thoughts!

Thanks,
Alex

Hi @Nils-Nilsson ,

We're considering "doing something" about this for our ProGet 2027 roadmap, but I really want to think about how this should be handled in ProGet. I want to create something that actually is helpful in identifying real security risks... and I'm not sure if our package-intended Policies is the move for Docker containers.

One major issue is that nearly all vulnerable packages in a container IMAGE pose zero risk. Even if the component were used (most aren't... they're just installed), exploitation would require someone SSH'ing into the container and running interactive commands. PGV-2387734 is a great example of this.

It's actually more risky to remediate the vulnerability and become "sensitized" to vulnerabilities like this. So, we want to make sure we can find way to "permanently mute" these for certain containers - and perhaps that involves saying "I do not actively use this component that happens to be installed in the image"? I'm not sure.

There are also some issues with the ways vulnerabilities work with certain Linux distros; for example, the "patch version" varies by operating system, and that information isn't readily available in the vulnerability database and ProGet isn't analyzing which operating system the platform is using.

We have a rough idea of treating Docker images to be more like SCA Builds than Feed Packages, in that an entire container image would be considered complaint. However, how many container images are built (it's done at CI for a lot of people), how few people seem to use pre-release tagging, etc., I don't know what makes sense here.

Anyway let me know your thoughts!

Thanks,
Alex

Hi @pg_user_8607 ,

Thanks! If you haven't already, please do check out our Migrating from Sonatype to ProGet guide.

[1] This is a common configuration, and it looks like anonymous is allowed based on the screenshot. It's hard to say withtout more troubleshooting. I would try using the Test Privileges function , which allows you to select a user, feed, and then it will show you all the task attributes available.

[2] To be honest, our users have not found those analyses to add any real value (outside of describing what the library does). So, starting in Q1 we've shifted our research efforts to align with the big changes to vulnerability management in ProGet 2026, including Category 5 Vulnerability Research. Check out the Vulnerability Management Done Right with ProGet guide to learn more about what's coming!

[3] No plans... in retrospect, there's no value in monitoring activity outside of checking the /health endpoint periodically. In fact, we've seen the opposite -- even monitoring HTTP traffic for abnormalities creates false positives that just wastes everyone's time.

For example, if NuGet.org is having an outage, then your NuGet feeds connect to nuget.org will run slow, as the connector times out.

[4] I suppose so! We'll update once we get ProGet 2026 out :)

Cheers,

Alex

@geraldizo_0690 thanks for clarifying!!

That's an interesting use case (i.e. using Otter/ProGet for vulnerability monitoring), though one we haven't really thought about. I can definitely see how the tools could work together to support that, but I suspect there are some key features/functionality that are missing (like getting notified, etc). Plus, a whole bunch of documentation and marketing to support the use case :)

It feels like we're taking on a whole new niche here, and there's a lot of solutions/players in this space. A quick search revealed Wazuh, OpenSCAP, Grype, Syft, etc. I've never heard of any of those, so it's hard to know how we could do something better. That would be first step -- why build "yet another solution" to this problem?

From a technical/solution standpoint, I think that something like a "pgutil but for system packages" might be a better choice. Just run that after a system update on the hosts, and that would push information to ProGet.

That simplifies configuration/management, and the two systems already have network access -- whereas opening up the host via SSH requires higher-level permissions, etc. It's lot of "adoption overhead", which means users won't really try it out.

A:nyway... it seems like we just need to "start from scratch" on this one. Definitely interested to learn more, but for now the main question would be "what problems can we uniquely solve that the existing tools can't".

Best,
Alex

Hi @no-doubt,

We are software engineers that provide technical support to technical end users. We cannot help non-technical users who provide no technical information. Moreover, I'm not willing to work with users who call our products "a real pain" and share counter-productive "facts" about how easy competitive products are. You should know better.

I'm going to lock this thread, but I'll give you another chance though.

If you'd like to continue your evaluation and receive technical support, please spend a few moments reviewing other forum posts to see how users communicate with us. If you feel comfortable doing that, then post again. If not, then it sounds like you've got two products to choose from.

Sincerly,

Alex

Hi @geraldizo_0690 ,

Thanks! That's pretty much where we left it, an "interesting feature" with no real demand. I'm glad you "get it" though and see some value here :)

This allows users to check whether the packages they use have already been updated with the latest security updates.

So to clarify, your envisioned usecase is system/Debian packages? What would you do on the Otter side? Orchestrate updates of those packages?

Cheers,
Alex

PS -- other issue is the list to address, easy fix just haven't gotten to it yet w/ PG2026 stuff

Hi @george-bowen_9415 ,

This was brought up at a internal review meeting, but I didn't want to have this added because I don't want to start adding configuration options to the AD v5 Directory - the goal is to "just work" for 95% of the use cases, and your configuration (37K users, 101 direct groups, 217 indirect groups) definitely falls within the 5%

So, our plan is to update the documentation on how to configure LDAP / OpenLDAP directory with AD. That's technically more work than adding a checkbox.... but this aligns with how most other products integrate with LADP/AD.

We plan to document this in the coming weeks, but in the meantime you could probably figure it out without the tutorial.

Cheers,
Alex

Hi @geraldizo_0690 ,

Thanks for trying out the feature! Unfortunately I think this feature broke around ProGet 2023 and no one seemed to notice it; we were actually planning on removing it in ProGet 2026.

We build the feature ages ago, but no one ever asked for it. It just "felt" like a "nice idea" at the time, but we never really thought out a proper use case. So was never documented very well and it would seem no one used it

Anyway... I'd be open to reviving it if we could actually figure out a use case. What are you trying to do? Would love to get an idea to see if we can solve a real-world problem here

Thanks,
Alex

Hi @paul-moors_5682 ,

We'll definitely keep an eye on this after ProGet 2026; we're doing some big improvements for vulnerability management, which will probably push more folks out of the Approval Workflow.

One thing I like about an in-built workflow is that it demos really well and makes it so much easier to see/understand how an approval workflow could work. While I personally love the idea of "approved packages only", it's so hard to recommend that workflow in practice.

Anyway, let us know how your approval-only journey goes. We tried it internally here and it was a flop... just Microsoft's growing dotnet dependencies alone made it impractical.

Cheers,
Alex

Hi @paul-moors_5682 ,

Thanks for sharing this idea; it's interesting idea and is actually something we talked about internally over the years.

However, after several conversations with a few customers who used the Package Promotion Workflow, they wouldn't find any value or use the feature. The reason is, they already have workflow tools (ServiceNow, JIRA) that document/automate SOP like these, and some will even do a quick API call once the package is approved.

In other words, everything happens in the workflow tool -- which is used for every other SOP from architecture review to vacation requests.

Now just to comment on the "best practices" part; we are working on revising our practices, but we don't consider "package promotion" the best practice anymore. Instead, we consider it the "option with the most control (and highest cost)".

If that level of control is not needed by the organization, then it shouldn't be used -- given the explosion of dependencies (1000+ for the average npm project), it's a lot of process to maintain. A lot of customers (military contractors, etc) are used to that level of process/control and it's fine.

But if you try to institute this at an organization without this process-heavy culture, you'll get a "rebellion" and just see shadow-IT and bypassing of these rules. And they won't get fired or even scolded.

And that brings us back to why no one seems to want this type of system -- companies with this level of process use ServiceNow/JIRA for everything already.

Cheers,
Alex