Ruff: Add PLW#13104
Conversation
🔴 Risk threshold exceeded.This pull request includes edits to the sensitive file dojo/models.py (detected twice) which were flagged as failing by the configured codepaths rule; these findings are non-blocking. The scanner notes that sensitive paths and allowed authors can be configured in .dryrunsecurity.yaml.
🔴 Configured Codepaths Edit in
|
| Vulnerability | Configured Codepaths Edit |
|---|---|
| Description | Sensitive edits detected for this file. Sensitive file paths and allowed authors can be configured in .dryrunsecurity.yaml. |
🔴 Configured Codepaths Edit in dojo/models.py
| Vulnerability | Configured Codepaths Edit |
|---|---|
| Description | Sensitive edits detected for this file. Sensitive file paths and allowed authors can be configured in .dryrunsecurity.yaml. |
We've notified @mtesauro.
All finding details can be found in the DryRun Security Dashboard.
Maffooch
dismissed
their stale review
I am second guessing myself on this one. Going to test in an instance first
Maffooch
left a comment
Maffooch
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was pretty sure that changing the variable and never doing anything would work, but wanted to double check. Since the values supplied by apply_cwe_to_template are directly on the object passed as the arg, we really don't need the finding returned at all. I think it would be pretty to remove it altogether. If it confused me, it will confuse others was well that are looking at this function
6 participants
No description provided.