This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 1, 2023. It is now read-only.
ignore RUSTSEC-2019-0036 #656
Merged
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
ranweiler
approved these changes
Mar 10, 2021
ghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This ignores RUSTSEC-2019-0036, a type confusion bug in failure (see rust-lang-deprecated/failure#336).
At the moment, failure is only brought in as a nested dependency of proc-maps and does not implement the pattern required to hit the type confusion bug. Additionally, the failure dependency is only used on OSX which we don't support (see rbspy/proc-maps#7).
As such, this security issue does not impact OneFuzz at the moment, but we should work to remove the dependency. Future updates to third-party dependencies may expose the vulnerability. This is a short-term fix for CICD only.
Issue to addressing this long term: #655