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

feat: scan for vuln #98

Closed
wants to merge 25 commits into from
Closed

feat: scan for vuln #98

wants to merge 25 commits into from

Conversation

naveensrinivasan
Copy link
Contributor

@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan commented Mar 30, 2024

Description

  • Scans Vulnerabilities for upstream and IronBank
  • Uses SBOM and grype to get the Vulns
  • The Vulns are reported into GH repo using SARIF

Related Issue

Fixes #

Relates to #

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Other (security config, docs update, etc)

Checklist before merging

@github-advanced-security
Copy link

This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation.

@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan force-pushed the naveen/feat/vulns branch 3 times, most recently from 709caec to f523bc9 Compare March 31, 2024 16:02
@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan self-assigned this Apr 1, 2024
@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan marked this pull request as ready for review April 1, 2024 18:57
@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan requested a review from a team as a code owner April 1, 2024 18:57
Copy link
Contributor

@Racer159 Racer159 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The output here is quite verbose - is it possible to dedupe some of these that are repeated?

https://github.com/defenseunicorns/uds-package-gitlab/security/code-scanning?query=pr%3A98+is%3Aopen

There also seem to be some that are titled as "medium" or "low" but labeled as "critical" or "high"

tasks/scanvulnerability.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tasks.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tasks.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tasks/scanvulnerability.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tasks/scanvulnerability.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
.github/workflows/scan-vulnerability.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@naveensrinivasan naveensrinivasan force-pushed the naveen/feat/vulns branch 7 times, most recently from aa78c10 to 3840a1a Compare April 2, 2024 15:10
@naveensrinivasan
Copy link
Contributor Author

The output here is quite verbose - is it possible to dedupe some of these that are repeated?

https://github.com/defenseunicorns/uds-package-gitlab/security/code-scanning?query=pr%3A98+is%3Aopen

There also seem to be some that are titled as "medium" or "low" but labeled as "critical" or "high"

  1. Image corresponding to the CVE- all of these CVEs have which image is reporting the CVE. registry1.dso.mil_ironbank_redhat_ubi_ubi9_9.3:1
    https://github.com/defenseunicorns/uds-package-gitlab/security/code-scanning/10337

  2. Duplicate issue - All the zlib issues are from different containers.https://github.com/defenseunicorns/uds-package-gitlab/security/code-scanning?query=pr%3A98+is%3Aopen+zlib

  3. Critical Issue having low in the title - The https://github.com/defenseunicorns/uds-package-gitlab/security/code-scanning/10212 is low because of the probability of exploiting the Vulnerability, and that is the reason low with Vuln being still critical.

Some help from ChatGPT for low
TL;DR:

  • Vulnerability severity is based on potential impact, exploit complexity, mitigations, impact, user interaction, exploitation environment, patch availability, and historical context.
  • Mitigating complexity, mitigations, limited impact, user interaction, and restricted exploitation environment can lower severity.
  • Prompt patches and historical context also influence severity classification.
  • The process ensures the effective allocation of resources to address pressing security concerns.

Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: naveensrinivasan <172697+naveensrinivasan@users.noreply.github.com>
@Racer159
Copy link
Contributor

closing this do to becoming stale (we can reopen / readdress later)

@Racer159 Racer159 closed this May 29, 2024
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.

3 participants