-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 185
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
[GSOC23] - C - Implement a StAX parser for OVAL files #7510
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Suggested tests to cover this Pull Request
|
8dc2d93
to
6d6dc0f
Compare
a279e94
to
7a5f2c7
Compare
👋 Hello! Thanks for contributing to our project. If you are unsure the failing tests are related to your code, you can check the "reference jobs". These are jobs that run on a scheduled time with code from master. If they fail for the same reason as your build, it means the tests or the infrastructure are broken. If they do not fail, but yours do, it means it is related to your code. Reference tests: KNOWN ISSUES Sometimes the build can fail when pulling new jar files from download.opensuse.org . This is a known limitation. Given this happens rarely, when it does, all you need to do is rerun the test. Sorry for the inconvenience. For more tips on troubleshooting, see the troubleshooting guide. Happy hacking! |
This PR is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 10 days. |
This PR was closed because it has been stalled for 10 days with no activity. |
@HoussemNasri @parlt91 i think this is still needed, right? |
Yes, the A and B pull requests need to be reviewed first before we can move to this one in case there was some changes that would affect this one (all PRs are kind of stacked on each other). Right now, pr A is under review. |
Than we better reopen this request |
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.
The issues that were pointed out regarding styles and how they're used in the previous pull request are still present in this one. The comments are marked as resolved, but the issues have not been addressed, see e.g. #7509 (comment) and #7509 (comment). Please do not mark issues as resolved if they have not been addressed.
9a8b53c
to
07266bb
Compare
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.
No frontend changes in the latest summa summarum changeset.
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 also did some testing around the changes. There seems to be an issue with parsing. A lot of info seems to be overridden. If I had to guess I'd say it looks like each bulk overrides the last one instead of adding onto it. Could you have a look into it?
I'll do another review round once these issues are addressed.
java/code/src/com/suse/oval/parser/OVALDefinitionsBulkHandler.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
- Also referenced the table from suseOVALPlatformVulnerablePackage
…a given OS product
07266bb
to
0401bee
Compare
* @param bulkHandler an operation to applied on every bulk of parsed OVAL definitions. | ||
* */ | ||
public void parseDefinitionsInBulk(File ovalFile, OVALDefinitionsBulkHandler bulkHandler) { | ||
XMLInputFactory xmlInputFactory = XMLInputFactory.newInstance(); |
Check failure
Code scanning / SonarCloud
XML parsers should not be vulnerable to XXE attacks High
d69ee50
to
495fe03
Compare
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.
Could you go a bit into detail on your though process for adding the ovalOsProduct
table? IIUC you use it to determine what data we need to delete from ovalPlatfromVulnerablePackage
on resync of the oval data to avoid conflicting data.
* Red Hat trademarks are not licensed under GPLv2. No permission is | ||
* granted to use or replicate Red Hat trademarks that are incorporated | ||
* in this software or its documentation. | ||
*/ |
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.
You need to use --
instead of *
as comment here.
productVulnerablePackages.stream() | ||
.collect(groupingBy(ProductVulnerablePackages::getProductCpe)) | ||
.keySet().forEach(OVALCachingFactory::clearOVALMetadataByPlatform); | ||
// productVulnerablePackages.stream() |
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 assume you used this for testing the sync multiple times, but we should enable it again before we merge.
<query params="os_product_family, os_product_version"> | ||
DELETE | ||
FROM suseOVALPlatformVulnerablePackage pvp | ||
WHERE pvp.platform_id = (SELECT id |
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.
Instead of deleting the OvalPlatformVulnerablePackage
entries manually, couldn't we just delete the associated OvalOsProduct
entry and have a cascading delete? I'd guess this would also perform better then deleting using a sub query.
DROP CONSTRAINT suse_oval_platform_vulnerable_pkg_id_pk; | ||
ALTER TABLE suseOVALPlatformVulnerablePackage | ||
ADD CONSTRAINT suse_oval_platform_vulnerable_pkg_id_pk PRIMARY KEY (product_os_id, platform_id, cve_id, vulnerable_pkg_id); | ||
|
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.
If I see this correctly we miss a foreign key for product_os_id
in the migration script.
alter table suseovalplatformvulnerablepackage add constraint suseovalplatformvulnerablepackage_os_product_id_fkey foreign key (product_os_id) references suseovalosproduct(id) on delete cascade;
We should also cascade on delete
What does this PR change?
Introduce a StAX parser (instead of the current JAXB parser) for OVAL files to increase memory efficiency when parsing large OVAL files.
Useful Links
GUI diff
No difference.
Before:
After:
Documentation
No documentation needed: add explanation. This can't be used if there is a GUI diff
No documentation needed: only internal and user invisible changes
Documentation issue was created: Link for SUSE Manager contributors, Link for community contributors.
API documentation added: please review the Wiki page Writing Documentation for the API if you have any changes to API documentation.
(OPTIONAL) Documentation PR
DONE
Test coverage
No tests: add explanation
No tests: already covered
Unit tests were added
Cucumber tests were added
DONE
Links
Fixes #
Tracks # add downstream PR, if any
Changelogs
Make sure the changelogs entries you are adding are compliant with https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#changelogs and https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#uyuni-projectuyuni-repository
If you don't need a changelog check, please mark this checkbox:
If you uncheck the checkbox after the PR is created, you will need to re-run
changelog_test
(see below)Re-run a test
If you need to re-run a test, please mark the related checkbox, it will be unchecked automatically once it has re-run: