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

Fixed the sarif write failure #183

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 2, 2025
Merged

Conversation

naveensrinivasan
Copy link
Member

@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan commented Jan 2, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Updated GitHub Actions workflow for Docker image scanning
    • Added a notification step to comment on pull requests if scan fails
    • Removed step for uploading scan results

Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 2, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the GitHub Actions workflow for Docker image scanning in the .github/workflows/grype.yaml file. The changes introduce a new notification mechanism to comment on pull requests when a security scan fails. The workflow retains the core scanning process using Grype, but removes the previous step for uploading scan results. The modification aims to improve vulnerability reporting and tracking during the container build and security assessment process.

Changes

File Change Summary
.github/workflows/grype.yaml - Removed Upload scan results step using CodeQL SARIF upload
- Added PR comment notification on scan failure

Poem

🐰 Scanning Docker with a hop and a leap,
Vulnerabilities caught, no secrets to keep!
A comment appears when troubles arise,
Security's watchful and always precise.
Code safety dances, a rabbit's delight! 🔍


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan enabled auto-merge (squash) January 2, 2025 14:55
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows/grype.yaml (2)

Line range hint 14-23: Enhance the failure notification message

While the notification mechanism is well-implemented, the message could be more informative by including:

  • The severity level that triggered the failure
  • A link to the security documentation or remediation guidelines

Consider this enhanced message:

           script: |
             github.rest.issues.createComment({
               issue_number: context.issue.number,
               owner: context.repo.owner,
               repo: context.repo.repo,
-              body: '❌ Container security scan failed. Please check the workflow logs.'
+              body: '❌ Container security scan failed: Found vulnerabilities at or above HIGH severity.\n\n' +
+                    'Please:\n' +
+                    '1. Check the workflow logs for detailed findings\n' +
+                    '2. Review our [Security Guidelines](../security.md) for remediation steps'
             })
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)


46-46: Add newline at end of file

Add a newline character at the end of the file to comply with YAML best practices.

   severity-cutoff: high
+
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 66b397d and 0e5a916.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/grype.yaml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)
.github/workflows/grype.yaml

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)

🔇 Additional comments (3)
.github/workflows/grype.yaml (3)

Line range hint 8-12: Well-configured concurrency settings!

The concurrency configuration effectively prevents parallel runs and resource wastage while ensuring only the latest PR changes are scanned.

🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)


Line range hint 42-46: Well-configured security scanning!

The configuration appropriately:

  • Uses pinned action versions for security
  • Sets a reasonable severity cutoff
  • Removes the problematic SARIF upload step that was causing failures
🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)


Line range hint 1-46: Verify security scan results are still accessible

While removing the SARIF upload fixes the workflow failure, please verify that security scan results are still accessible through:

  1. The workflow logs
  2. The new PR comment notification

Run this script to check recent workflow runs and comments:

✅ Verification successful

Security scan results remain accessible through workflow logs and notifications

The verification confirms:

  1. The workflow runs are properly executing and visible in GitHub Actions, showing both successful and failed runs
  2. The scan results are accessible through:
    • GitHub Actions workflow logs (as evidenced by the workflow run history)
    • Failure notifications via PR comments (the notification mechanism is properly configured in the workflow)

The removal of SARIF upload doesn't impact the visibility of scan results since:

  • The workflow still fails on high severity findings (fail-build: true)
  • Failed scans trigger a PR comment notification
  • Full scan details remain available in the workflow logs
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the visibility of security scan results

# Check recent workflow runs
gh run list --workflow=grype.yaml --limit 5

# Check if notifications are being created
gh pr view 183 --json comments --jq '.comments[] | select(.body | contains("Container security scan failed"))'

Length of output: 1098

🧰 Tools
🪛 yamllint (1.35.1)

[error] 46-46: no new line character at the end of file

(new-line-at-end-of-file)

@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan merged commit b2f66df into main Jan 2, 2025
12 of 13 checks passed
@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan deleted the naveen/removed-sarif-output branch January 2, 2025 14:59
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 2, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant