Conversation
Add nolint directives for taint analysis false positives on user-provided file paths. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Summary of ChangesHello @horgh, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request addresses Highlights
Changelog
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
Modver resultThis report was generated by Modver, This PR does not require a change in your module’s version number. |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request addresses a gosec G703 lint issue by adding nolint directives. The change is appropriate for a command-line tool where file paths are provided by a trusted user. My feedback focuses on improving the clarity and descriptiveness of the nolint comments for better long-term maintainability, suggesting the inclusion of the specific lint rule ID and a clearer justification for suppressing the warning.
| hexRange bool, | ||
| ) error { | ||
| outFile, err := os.Create(filepath.Clean(outputFile)) | ||
| outFile, err := os.Create(filepath.Clean(outputFile)) //nolint:gosec // user-provided path |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The nolint comment could be more descriptive. While it's correct to suppress this for a CLI tool, the reason should be clearer. Stating it's a user-provided path is what triggers the gosec G703 (path traversal) lint; the justification for suppression is the context (a CLI tool where the user is trusted). Including the specific lint rule ID is also helpful for maintainability.
| outFile, err := os.Create(filepath.Clean(outputFile)) //nolint:gosec // user-provided path | |
| outFile, err := os.Create(filepath.Clean(outputFile)) //nolint:gosec // G703: False positive for a CLI tool where user-provided paths are expected. |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| inFile, err := os.Open(filepath.Clean(inputFile)) | ||
| inFile, err := os.Open(filepath.Clean(inputFile)) //nolint:gosec // user-provided path |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similar to the output file path, this nolint comment could be more descriptive. Explicitly stating the lint rule ID (G703) and the reason for suppression (CLI tool context) improves code clarity and maintainability for anyone reading the code in the future.
| inFile, err := os.Open(filepath.Clean(inputFile)) //nolint:gosec // user-provided path | |
| inFile, err := os.Open(filepath.Clean(inputFile)) //nolint:gosec // G703: False positive for a CLI tool where user-provided paths are expected. |
oschwald
deleted the
wstorey/eng-4203-lints-from-new-golangci-lint-are-fixed-in-githubcom-repos
branch
2 participants
Summary
Test plan
golangci-lint run ./...passes with 0 issues🤖 Generated with Claude Code