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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[No QA] [Snyk] Security upgrade webpack from 5.74.0 to 5.76.0 #15887

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 13, 2023
Merged

[No QA] [Snyk] Security upgrade webpack from 5.74.0 to 5.76.0 #15887

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 13, 2023

Conversation

snyk-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Snyk has created this PR to fix one or more vulnerable packages in the `npm` dependencies of this project.

Changes included in this PR

  • Changes to the following files to upgrade the vulnerable dependencies to a fixed version:
    • package.json
    • package-lock.json

Vulnerabilities that will be fixed

With an upgrade:
Severity Issue Breaking Change Exploit Maturity
high severity Sandbox Bypass
SNYK-JS-WEBPACK-3358798		 No Proof of Concept
Commit messages
Package name: webpack The new version differs by 75 commits.

See the full diff

Check the changes in this PR to ensure they won't cause issues with your project.

Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open fix PRs.

For more information:
🧐 View latest project report

🛠 Adjust project settings

📚 Read more about Snyk's upgrade and patch logic

Learn how to fix vulnerabilities with free interactive lessons:

🦉 Learn about vulnerability in an interactive lesson of Snyk Learn.

@snyk-bot snyk-bot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 13, 2023 12:18
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from dangrous and removed request for a team March 13, 2023 12:19
@MelvinBot
Copy link

@dangrous Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

dangrous
dangrous approved these changes Mar 13, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dangrous dangrous left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor version bump so should be good; I checked out the branch and confirmed that the App seems to work fine w/out any new errors on all platforms.

@dangrous
Copy link
Contributor

dangrous commented Mar 13, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android / native
    • Android / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • MacOS / Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS / Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(themeColors.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

No specific thing to screenshot so have not included - but checked each platform to make sure it loaded fine.

Screenshots/Videos

Web
Mobile Web - Chrome
Mobile Web - Safari
Desktop
iOS
Android

@dangrous dangrous changed the title [Snyk] Security upgrade webpack from 5.74.0 to 5.76.0 [No QA] [Snyk] Security upgrade webpack from 5.74.0 to 5.76.0 Mar 13, 2023
@dangrous dangrous merged commit 8a04b2c into main Mar 13, 2023
@dangrous dangrous deleted the snyk-fix-c46ec85eacf63bf86cd344a8b269afe2 branch March 13, 2023 14:37
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2023
Closed
7 tasks
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/dangrous in version: 1.2.84-0 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/dangrous in version: 1.2.84-0 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.2.84-1 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dangrous dangrous dangrous approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@snyk-bot @MelvinBot @dangrous @OSBotify