chore(StepSecurity): Add CodeQL #786
Conversation
## Security Fixes ### Detect Vulnerabilities with SAST Workflow Static Code Analysis (also known as Source Code Analysis) is usually performed as part of a Code Review (also known as clear-box testing) and is carried out at the Implementation phase of a Security Development Lifecycle (SDL). Static Code Analysis commonly refers to the running of Static Code Analysis tools that attempt to highlight possible vulnerabilities within ‘static’ (non-running) source code by using techniques such as Taint Analysis and Data Flow Analysis. - [The Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF) Security Guide](https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/blob/main/docs/checks.md#sast) - [OWASP Static Code Analysis](https://owasp.org/www-community/controls/Static_Code_Analysis) - [Github Guide For Code Scanning](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/automatically-scanning-your-code-for-vulnerabilities-and-errors/setting-up-code-scanning-for-a-repository) Signed-off-by: StepSecurity Bot <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces a new GitHub Actions workflow file Changes
Suggested reviewers
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
|
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. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
.github/workflows/codeql.yml (3)
14-21: Consider renaming the target branch from "master" to "main".GitHub's default branch name is "main". For consistency with modern practices, consider updating the branch name.
- branches: ["master"] + branches: ["main"]🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
[failure] 16-16:
16:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 19-19:
19:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 21-21:
21:5 [indentation] wrong indentation: expected 2 but found 4
[failure] 21-21:
21:13 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
56-69: Document build requirements and steps.Since the repository contains Python code, it would be helpful to document the build requirements and steps in case the autobuild fails. Consider adding a
buildscript.shwith the necessary setup commands.Would you like me to help create a
buildscript.shtemplate with Python build commands?🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
[warning] 58-58:
58:87 [comments] too few spaces before comment
1-73: Fix YAML formatting issues.The following formatting issues should be addressed:
- Fix indentation (e.g., line 21 should use 2 spaces)
- Break long lines (e.g., lines 40, 48, 51)
Note: The quoted strings warnings can be ignored as they're actually good practice in GitHub Actions workflows.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
[warning] 12-12:
12:1 [document-start] missing document start "---"
[failure] 12-12:
12:7 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 16-16:
16:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 19-19:
19:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 21-21:
21:5 [indentation] wrong indentation: expected 2 but found 4
[failure] 21-21:
21:13 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 38-38:
38:20 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 40-40:
40:81 [line-length] line too long (97 > 80 characters)
[failure] 43-43:
43:7 [indentation] wrong indentation: expected 4 but found 6
[warning] 44-44:
44:73 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[warning] 48-48:
48:82 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[failure] 48-48:
48:81 [line-length] line too long (90 > 80 characters)
[failure] 51-51:
51:81 [line-length] line too long (90 > 80 characters)
[warning] 58-58:
58:87 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[warning] 71-71:
71:85 [comments] too few spaces before comment
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
.github/workflows/codeql.yml(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
.github/workflows/codeql.yml
[warning] 12-12:
12:1 [document-start] missing document start "---"
[failure] 12-12:
12:7 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 16-16:
16:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 19-19:
19:16 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 21-21:
21:5 [indentation] wrong indentation: expected 2 but found 4
[failure] 21-21:
21:13 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 38-38:
38:20 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 40-40:
40:81 [line-length] line too long (97 > 80 characters)
[failure] 43-43:
43:7 [indentation] wrong indentation: expected 4 but found 6
[warning] 44-44:
44:73 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[warning] 48-48:
48:82 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[failure] 48-48:
48:81 [line-length] line too long (90 > 80 characters)
[failure] 51-51:
51:81 [line-length] line too long (90 > 80 characters)
[warning] 58-58:
58:87 [comments] too few spaces before comment
[warning] 71-71:
71:85 [comments] too few spaces before comment
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (2)
- GitHub Check: 🧪 Tests / pytest@🐍3.13@windows-2025
- GitHub Check: pre-commit
🔇 Additional comments (3)
.github/workflows/codeql.yml (3)
23-34: LGTM! Well-configured permissions following the principle of least privilege.The permissions are correctly configured:
- Read-only access for contents and actions
- Write access for security-events (required for CodeQL)
44-44: LGTM! Secure version pinning using SHA hashes.All GitHub Actions are correctly pinned to specific SHA hashes, which is a security best practice to prevent supply chain attacks.
Also applies to: 48-48, 58-58, 71-71
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
[warning] 44-44:
44:73 [comments] too few spaces before comment
35-41: Verify complete language coverage for the repository.Currently, only Python analysis is configured. Let's verify if there are other languages that should be included in the CodeQL analysis.
✅ Verification successful
Python-only CodeQL analysis is correct for this repository
The repository primarily contains Python source code and shell scripts. Since shell scripts are not supported by CodeQL, and other files are non-executable resources or configurations, the current Python-only analysis setup is appropriate.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check for other programming languages in the repository that CodeQL supports # List of files by extension, excluding common non-source directories echo "Files by extension:" find . -type f -not -path "*/\.*" -not -path "*/node_modules/*" -not -path "*/venv/*" -not -path "*/dist/*" | grep -o '\.[^/.]*$' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr # Get list of supported CodeQL languages echo -e "\nSupported CodeQL languages:" gh api graphql -f query=' { repository(owner: "github", name: "codeql") { object(expression: "main:cpp/ql/lib") { ... on Tree { entries { name } } } } }'Length of output: 1167
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: 🧹 Linters / pre-commit@🐍3.13@ubuntu-latest
[failure] 38-38:
38:20 [quoted-strings] string value is redundantly quoted with any quotes
[failure] 40-40:
40:81 [line-length] line too long (97 > 80 characters)
|
I'll wait for when you make linters happy as the change isn't readable because of amount of comments added by linters 🤪 |
|
This PR is included in version 1.97.1 🎉 |
4 participants
Description of your changes
Changes in this pull request is provided by StepSecurity
Security Fixes
Detect Vulnerabilities with SAST Workflow
Static Code Analysis (also known as Source Code Analysis) is usually performed as part of a Code Review (also known as clear-box testing) and is carried out at the Implementation phase of a Security Development Lifecycle (SDL). Static Code Analysis commonly refers to the running of Static Code Analysis tools that attempt to highlight possible vulnerabilities within ‘static’ (non-running) source code by using techniques such as Taint Analysis and Data Flow Analysis.
Summary by CodeRabbit