-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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.
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
[2/2] Add Security workflows: GoSec scan workflow #1923
[2/2] Add Security workflows: GoSec scan workflow #1923
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1923 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 89.95% 89.95% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 381 381
Lines 18519 18519
==========================================
- Hits 16659 16658 -1
- Misses 1390 1391 +1
Partials 470 470
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
# │ │ │ │ │ | ||
# │ │ │ │ │ | ||
# * * * * * | ||
- cron: '30 2 * * *' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not running this for every PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn’t want it to be a blocker for development for now. This workflow fails when it finds potential issues, some of which may also be false positives. Right now there are a lot of issues that it flags so it would always be failing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we need to start fixing the issues, otherwise this will be useless. We do have it enabled in the core collector and was not that hard :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Where is it enabled in the core collector? I opened this same PR in the core collector repo because I thought it did not exist already. Even in the core collector this GoSec workflow fails because of many issues.
I will also create a new issue to fix GoSec issues if this PR gets merged. I think it would be best to fix the initial set of issues in a separate PR and then enable this for every future PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@bogdandrutu looks like we restricted gosec to a very small set of rules in the core collector, whereas this workflow uses all rules, hence why I saw many more errors. I will follow up and update this to run the same rules at the core collector and run on PR builds as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
small set of rules in the core collector
We disable only 2 rules "G402" and "G404" :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah nevermind, I thought those were the only 2 being used
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please start fixing problems if you want, see #1955 that enables always gosec
I am going to close this PR since #1955 enables always and also fixed bunch of errors. |
Motivation
Related to #1922 and issue open-telemetry/oteps#144
GoSec is a static analysis engine which scans go source code for security vulnerabilities. As the project grows and we near GA it might be useful to have a workflow which checks for security vulnerabilities so we can ensure every incremental change is following best development practices. Also passing basic security checks will also make sure that there aren't any glaring issues for our users.
Changes
This PR adds GoSec security checks to the repo
Workflow Triggers
cc- @alolita