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

Filter out non-applicable violations if requested by policy #275

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Jan 6, 2025

Conversation

eranturgeman
Copy link
Contributor

@eranturgeman eranturgeman commented Jan 2, 2025

  • The pull request is targeting the dev branch.
  • The code has been validated to compile successfully by running go vet ./....
  • The code has been formatted properly using go fmt ./....
  • All static analysis checks passed.
  • All tests have passed. If this feature is not already covered by the tests, new tests have been added.
  • Updated the Contributing page / ReadMe page / CI Workflow files if needed.
  • All changes are detailed at the description. if not already covered at JFrog Documentation, new documentation have been added.

This PR introduces new ability that allows filtering out all non-applicable CVEs from the scan results.
The filtering occurs only if ALL of the incurred violation's policies state that non-applicable CVEs should be skipped. else - the violation will not be filtered.

Depends on: jfrog/jfrog-client-go#1067

@eranturgeman eranturgeman added improvement Automatically generated release notes safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request labels Jan 2, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request and removed safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request labels Jan 5, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request and removed safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request labels Jan 5, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 5, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman requested a review from orz25 January 5, 2025 09:48
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 5, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 5, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
…o skip-not-applicable-cves-2

# Conflicts:
#	utils/results/common.go
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Jan 6, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 6, 2025

👍 Frogbot scanned this pull request and did not find any new security issues.


Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 6, 2025

Merging this branch will not change overall coverage

Impacted Packages Coverage Δ 🤖
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/audit 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas/runner 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/tests/utils 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results/conversion 0.00% (ø)

Coverage by file

Changed files (no unit tests)

Changed File Coverage Δ Total Covered Missed 🤖
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/audit/scarunner.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas/runner/jasrunner.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/tests/utils/test_utils.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results/common.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results/results.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0

Please note that the "Total", "Covered", and "Missed" counts above refer to code statements instead of lines of code. The value in brackets refers to the test coverage of that file in the old version of the code.

Changed unit test files

  • github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/audit_test.go
  • github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results/common_test.go
  • github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/results/conversion/convertor_test.go
  • github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/xsc_test.go

@eranturgeman eranturgeman merged commit c1d19ba into jfrog:dev Jan 6, 2025
56 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
improvement Automatically generated release notes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants