Address G115 findings #1670
Merged
Address G115 findings #1670
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
SaschaSchwarze0
added
the
kind/failing-test
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
release-note-none
pull-request-size
bot
added
the
size/M
SaschaSchwarze0
force-pushed
the
sascha-fix-g115
branch
from
823be55
to
48df4b9
Compare
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: SaschaSchwarze0 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Changes
We have new gosec findings in https://github.com/shipwright-io/build/actions/runs/10484927930/job/29040118261?pr=1668 for the new G115 rule. Interestingly, gosec has not even released that while golangci-lint already validates it.
We actually had one real though unrealistic finding for the limits that we allow users to define for number of buildruns in a build. We have a uint there and casted it to int which theoretically can fail if a user would use an unreasonably high value that goes beyond math.MaxInt. I therefore declared a reasnably high maximum in the type and nosec'ed it.
In the bundle package, the finding is imo unrealistic but suddenly Go's tar Header type uses an int64 where it should be better using maybe directly os.FileMode.
Submitter Checklist
Release Notes