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.

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

Add Skip Not Applicable Flag to audit and scan commands #246

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dortam888
Copy link
Contributor

@dortam888 dortam888 commented Nov 25, 2024

  • The pull request is targeting the dev branch.
  • The code has been validated to compile successfully by running go vet ./....
  • The code has been formatted properly using go fmt ./....
  • All static analysis checks passed.
  • All tests have passed. If this feature is not already covered by the tests, new tests have been added.
  • Updated the Contributing page / ReadMe page / CI Workflow files if needed.
  • All changes are detailed at the description. if not already covered at JFrog Documentation, new documentation have been added.

Add skip-not-applicable flag to docker scan and audit command to show results of scan without not applicable cves

@dortam888 dortam888 changed the title Skip non applicable Add Skip Not Applicable Flag to audit and scan commands Nov 25, 2024
@dortam888 dortam888 added improvement Automatically generated release notes safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request labels Nov 26, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Nov 26, 2024
@dortam888 dortam888 added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Dec 2, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Dec 2, 2024
@dortam888 dortam888 requested a review from attiasas December 2, 2024 01:02
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 2, 2024

Merging this branch will not change overall coverage

Impacted Packages Coverage Δ 🤖
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/cli 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/cli/docs 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/audit 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/scan 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas/applicability 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/formats/sarifutils 0.00% (ø)
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/xray/scangraph 0.00% (ø)

Coverage by file

Changed files (no unit tests)

Changed File Coverage Δ Total Covered Missed 🤖
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/cli/docs/flags.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/cli/scancommands.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/audit/audit.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/audit/auditparams.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/commands/scan/scan.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas/applicability/applicabilitymanager.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/jas/common.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/formats/sarifutils/sarifutils.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/formats/sarifutils/test_sarifutils.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0
github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/xray/scangraph/params.go 0.00% (ø) 0 0 0

Please note that the "Total", "Covered", and "Missed" counts above refer to code statements instead of lines of code. The value in brackets refers to the test coverage of that file in the old version of the code.

Changed unit test files

  • github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-security/utils/formats/sarifutils/sarifutils_test.go

Copy link
Contributor

@eranturgeman eranturgeman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This PR needs to be closed and be re-written according to the way we implemented the filtering here: #257
Please wait until this PR is merged before starting working on it since it still might go through changes in the next few days.
The "flag handling" logic will probably stay the same but the filtering logic has moved to the results convertors

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
improvement Automatically generated release notes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants