Ares: ArchUnit Command Execution
#23
Conversation
|
Caution Review failedThe pull request is closed. WalkthroughThe changes involve significant updates to the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (7)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/FileHandlerConstants.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/JavaArchitectureTestCase.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (7 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/archunit/files/java/methods/command-execution-methods.txt (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/commandexecution/CommandExecutingStudent.java (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- src/main/resources/archunit/files/java/methods/command-execution-methods.txt
Additional comments not posted (11)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/commandexecution/CommandExecutingStudent.java (4)
7-10: Clarify the intention of the method.The method initializes a
ProcessBuilderbut does not specify any commands before starting it. If this is intended to test the instantiation without command execution, please add a comment clarifying this. Otherwise, consider specifying a command or removing thestart()call if it's not necessary.
12-16: Method correctly sets up and executes a command.This method is well-implemented for the purpose of testing command execution using
ProcessBuilder. It correctly sets the command and starts the process.
18-20: Method correctly demonstrates command execution usingRuntime.exec.The implementation is correct for the purpose of testing command execution scenarios using
Runtime.getRuntime().exec.
22-24: Method correctly demonstrates command execution with arguments.This method correctly uses an array to specify the command, which is useful for testing scenarios where command execution includes arguments.
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java (2)
12-19: Annotations appropriately configure the test environment.The use of multiple annotations such as
@Public,@UseLocale,@AllowThreads, and others effectively set up a controlled and specific test environment, which is crucial for accurate and reliable testing.
22-24: Clarify the purpose of the empty test method.The method is currently empty. If this is intended to focus on testing through annotations and security policies, please add a comment clarifying this. Otherwise, consider implementing the test logic or providing further details on its intended use.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/FileHandlerConstants.java (1)
16-16: New constant addition is appropriate and follows existing patterns.The addition of
JAVA_COMMAND_EXECUTION_METHODSis consistent with the structure of the class and enhances its functionality by providing a clear reference for command execution methods.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/JavaArchitectureTestCase.java (1)
78-78: Approved: Updated handling for COMMAND_EXECUTION.The change from throwing an
UnsupportedOperationExceptionto actually checking command execution withNO_CLASSES_SHOULD_EXECUTE_COMMANDS.check(classes)is a significant improvement. It aligns with the PR's objective to enhance command execution tests using ArchUnit.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (2)
34-35: Refactor Approved: Simplified method for loading forbidden methods.The change from a more complex method to
getForbiddenMethodswhich directly reads lines from a file is a positive change. It simplifies the code and reduces potential errors.
143-159: New Architectural Rule Added: NO_CLASSES_SHOULD_EXECUTE_COMMANDS.The addition of
NO_CLASSES_SHOULD_EXECUTE_COMMANDSis crucial for enforcing command execution rules within the architecture. This aligns with the PR's objectives and enhances the security and maintainability of the codebase.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (1)
78-78: Approved: Enhanced test case coverage for command execution.Activating
iAllowTheFollowingCommandExecutionsForTheStudentsin the test case parsing logic is a positive change. It ensures that command execution permissions are appropriately managed and tested, aligning with the PR's objectives.
# Conflicts: # src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/JavaArchitectureTestCase.java # src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecturetest/java/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java # src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java # src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/methods/command-execution-methods.txt
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (6)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/FileHandlerConstants.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchUnitSecurityTestCase.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (5 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/CommandExecutionTest.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (24)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/CommandExecutionTest.java (4)
1-8: LGTM!The package declaration and imports are correct and necessary for the test class.
11-12: LGTM!The class name and
@UserBasedannotation are appropriate for a test class for command execution.
14-15: LGTM!The
testsfield is correctly declared and annotated to store the test results for the user specified in the@UserBasedannotation.
17-20: LGTM!The
test_testExecuteCommandmethod is correctly declared and annotated as a test method. The assertion is correct and verifies that thetestExecuteCommandtest fails with aSecurityException.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java (2)
12-20: Class annotations look good!The class is well-annotated with appropriate annotations to configure the test environment. The annotations provide useful information about the test class, such as the locale, timeout, and path restrictions.
14-14: Verify the need for allowing 100 active threads.The
@AllowThreadsannotation is set to allow a maximum of 100 active threads. While this might be justified based on the nature of the tests, it's a high value that could potentially impact the test environment.Please ensure that allowing 100 active threads is necessary and document the reason for this choice. If not needed, consider reducing the
maxActiveCountto a lower value.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/FileHandlerConstants.java (6)
3-3: LGTM!The import statement is necessary for using the
FileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod in the constants.
13-13: LGTM!Using
FileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod for constructing the file path improves the readability and maintainability of the code.
14-14: LGTM!Using
FileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod for constructing the file path improves the readability and maintainability of the code.
15-15: LGTM!Using
FileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod for constructing the file path improves the readability and maintainability of the code.
16-16: LGTM!Using
FileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod for constructing the file path improves the readability and maintainability of the code.
17-17: LGTM!The new constant
JAVA_COMMAND_EXECUTION_METHODSis added to define the path for the file listing command execution methods. UsingFileTools.resolveOnResourcesmethod for constructing the file path is consistent with the other constants and improves the readability and maintainability of the code.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchUnitSecurityTestCase.java (1)
94-94: LGTM! The new implementation enhances the handling of command execution violations.The changes in the
COMMAND_EXECUTIONcase of theexecuteArchitectureTestCasemethod are approved.The new implementation replaces the
UnsupportedOperationExceptionwith a call toJavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.NO_CLASSES_SHOULD_EXECUTE_COMMANDS.check(classes), which performs a validation check against the providedclassesparameter. This allows for more nuanced handling of command execution violations instead of simply throwing an exception.The change enhances the functionality by introducing a validation step while also cleaning up unused imports, as evident from the removal of the
IOExceptionimport.Overall, the modifications improve the code by providing better violation handling and simplifying the codebase.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (10)
9-9: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
17-17: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
34-36: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
44-46: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
55-57: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
73-74: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
113-115: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
124-124: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
143-147: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
150-153: LGTM!The code changes are approved.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (1)
192-192: LGTM!The change to include the
regardingCommandExecutionsmethod in themethodsarray is approved. This enhances the functionality of thecreateSecurityTestCasesmethod by enabling it to utilize theregardingCommandExecutionsmethod from theresourceAccessesobject, thereby expanding the scope of security tests.
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (4)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (5 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (3 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java
Additional context used
yamllint
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml
[error] 27-27: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
Additional comments not posted (6)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml (3)
17-17: Clarify the purpose and necessity of theorg.aspectjimport.A new import for
org.aspectjhas been added, which suggests that the policy may now interact with AspectJ, an aspect-oriented programming framework. Please provide clarification on:
- The purpose and necessity of this import.
- The new functionality or dependencies introduced by this import.
Consider adding documentation or comments to explain the changes and their implications on the policy's behavior.
19-19: Clarify the purpose and necessity of thejava.netimport and conduct a security review.A new import for
java.nethas been added, which suggests that the policy may now interact with network-related functionalities. Please provide clarification on:
- The purpose and necessity of this import.
- The specific network-related functionalities being introduced.
Recommend conducting a thorough security review to ensure that the network-related functionalities are implemented securely and align with the policy's objectives. Consider potential risks, such as unauthorized network access or data leakage, and implement appropriate security measures.
14-14: Verify the correctness of the new package import.The package import has been changed from
de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.aspectj.adviceandpointcuttode.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.java.aspectj.adviceandpointcut. Please ensure that:
- The new package import is correct.
- The referenced classes are available in the new location.
- The change does not adversely affect the policy's behavior.
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml (3)
22-22: Verify the package change forjava.nio.Please confirm if the change from
java.nio.filetojava.niois intentional. If so, ensure that the broader import is necessary and does not introduce unused imports.
24-27: Verify the new imports fororg.aspectj,jdk.internal,java.net, andsun.reflect.Please confirm if the new imports are necessary for the functionality of the code. If not, consider removing them to avoid introducing unused imports.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 27-27: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
21-21: Verify the package change forde.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.aspectj.adviceandpointcut.Please confirm if the change from
de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.aspectj.adviceandpointcuttode.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.java.aspectj.adviceandpointcutis intentional. If so, ensure that all code relying on the old import has been updated to use the new package.Run the following script to search for usages of the old import:
...ces/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ces/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...ces/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sarpsahinalp
changed the title
- Made code Java 16 compatible - Moved code into "api" folder - Compare paths by "startsWith" instead of "equals" or "contains" - Removed explicit setting of "restrictedPackage" - Removed path methods from weaving and instrumentation - JavaSecurityTestCase.setJavaAdviceSettingValue now checks the "aopMode" - JavaSecurityTestCaseSettings.allowedListedClasses is now null by default - Existence of "javaBuildMode", "javaArchitectureMode" and "javaAOPMode" is now checked in JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder - allowedListedClasses now depends on what is tested
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/AOPSecurityTestCase.java (2)
30-30: Update the method documentation.Please update the method documentation to include the new
aomModeparameter and explain its purpose.
41-41: Update the method documentation.Please update the method documentation to include the new
aomModeparameter and explain its purpose.src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (1)
Line range hint
211-224: Acknowledge the TODO comment.The TODO comment indicates that the
desktopExecuteMethodspointcut should be considered for separation into different pointcut files. This is a valid suggestion to improve modularity and maintainability.Consider creating a separate issue to track the refactoring effort and ensure that it is addressed in a future update.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java (2)
100-100: Review the restricted package name to avoid false positives.The change from an exact match to a prefix match for the restricted package name could potentially restrict unintended packages that have a similar prefix. Please review the restricted package name to ensure it is specific enough to avoid any unintended matches that could lead to false positives in the call stack criteria violation check.
214-217: LGTM: Early return based on "aopMode" setting adds flexibility.The addition of an early return condition based on the "aopMode" setting in the
checkFileSystemInteractionmethod is a good change. It allows the method to exit early if the "aopMode" setting is not set to "INSTRUMENTATION", providing flexibility to conditionally enable or disable the file system interaction checks based on the configuration.To improve the clarity and maintainability of the code, consider adding documentation or comments to explain the purpose and usage of the "aopMode" setting. This will help future maintainers understand the intended behavior and configuration options.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (1)
Line range hint
199-218: Enhancements to security test case creation.The creation of the
allowedPackagesset and the addition of default package permissions ensure that specific packages are allowed during the security tests. This enhances the security test case creation process.Creating a new
JavaArchUnitSecurityTestCasewith thePACKAGE_IMPORTtest case and theallowedPackagesset further strengthens the security testing capabilities.Observation: Commented-out line.
The commented-out line
(Supplier<List<?>>) resourceAccesses::regardingCommandExecutions,suggests potential future use for command execution-related security tests. Consider removing the comment if it's not needed or adding a TODO comment to track the future implementation.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (28)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/AOPSecurityTestCase.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaAOPMode.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCase.java (13 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseSettings.java (3 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj (3 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (9 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java (5 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/JavaArchitectureMode.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (6 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseSettingsHeader.txt (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj (6 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (11 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java (7 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/FileHandlerConstants.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchUnitTestCaseSupported.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollectionHeader.txt (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/CustomClassResolver.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/TransitivelyAccessesMethodsCondition.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml (2 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (11)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseSettingsHeader.txt
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathAdvice.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathAdvice.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathAdvice.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchUnitTestCaseSupported.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/CustomClassResolver.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollection.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/postcompile/TransitivelyAccessesMethodsCondition.java
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCase.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseSettings.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/FileHandlerConstants.java
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/EverythingForbiddenPolicy.yaml
Additional context used
yamllint
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml
[error] 20-20: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
Additional comments not posted (44)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml (4)
3-3: LGTM!The package name change from
de.tum.cit.asetode.tum.cit.ase.aresis appropriate and provides a more specific context for the supervised code.
5-5: Verify the impact on testing coverage.The list of test classes has been emptied. Please ensure that this change does not negatively impact the project's testing coverage. If the removal of test classes is intentional, consider documenting the reason for this change.
19-20: Verify the impact of import changes.The import statements have undergone significant changes:
- The import for
java.langhas been removed, which may restrict access to fundamental Java classes.- The import for
de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.aop.aspectj.adviceandpointcuthas been removed, possibly indicating a change in aspect-oriented programming dependencies.- The import for
java.nio.filehas been replaced withjava.nio, which could expand the range of classes available for file operations.Please ensure that these changes do not break the project's functionality or introduce incompatibilities with existing dependencies. Consider documenting the reasons for these changes and their expected impact on the codebase.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 20-20: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
20-20: Add a new line at the end of the file.This issue has been flagged in a previous review comment:
To adhere to the YAML style guide and avoid parsing issues, please add a new line at the end of the file.
Please address this issue to ensure compliance with the YAML style guide and prevent potential parsing problems.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 20-20: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml (2)
3-4: LGTM!The addition of package and main class configurations provides clarity about the programming context and the entry point of the supervised code.
13-15: LGTM!The removal of network connection, command execution, and thread creation permissions reflects a more restrictive security policy regarding resource access. This helps to prevent potential security vulnerabilities and ensures that the supervised code operates within a controlled environment.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/architecture/java/archunit/JavaArchitectureTestCaseCollectionHeader.txt (1)
1-1: LGTM!The package declaration change from
%sto%s.apiis a good refactoring decision. It improves the organization of the codebase by categorizing API-related classes and interfaces under a more specific namespace. This change enhances the clarity and maintainability of the project structure.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/AOPSecurityTestCase.java (2)
41-41: Verify the method signature change in the codebase.The method signature change is valid. However, ensure that all implementations of this interface have been updated to include the new
aomModeparameter.Run the following script to verify the method usage:
Verification successful
Method signature change verified successfully
The
executeAOPSecurityTestCasemethod signature change has been correctly implemented across the codebase. All occurrences of the method, including its interface definition, implementation, and usage, are consistent with the new signature that includes the@Nonnull String aomModeparameter.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all implementations of `executeAOPSecurityTestCase` match the new signature. # Test: Search for the method usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature. rg --type java -A 5 $'executeAOPSecurityTestCase'Length of output: 1868
30-30: Verify the method signature change in the codebase.The method signature change is valid. However, ensure that all implementations of this interface have been updated to include the new
aomModeparameter.Run the following script to verify the method usage:
Verification successful
Method signature change verified successfully
The
writeAOPSecurityTestCasemethod signature has been correctly updated across the codebase. The interface definition, implementation, and related method calls all include the new@Nonnull String aomModeparameter. No instances of the old signature were found, indicating consistent application of the change.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all implementations of `writeAOPSecurityTestCase` match the new signature. # Test: Search for the method usage. Expect: Only occurrences of the new signature. rg --type java -A 5 $'writeAOPSecurityTestCase'Length of output: 2688
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/architecture/java/JavaArchitectureMode.java (2)
60-74: LGTM!The changes to the directory structure in the path arrays are consistent and do not affect the functionality of the method. The changes indicate a potential restructuring of the project's directory organization, which may impact how the application resolves file paths for architectural checks and tests. However, the changes do not introduce any correctness, performance, or security issues.
109-109: LGTM!The change to the directory structure in the path array is consistent with the changes made in the
targetsToCopyTomethod and does not affect the functionality of the method. The change indicates a potential restructuring of the project's directory organization, which may impact how the application resolves file paths for architectural checks and tests. However, the change does not introduce any correctness, performance, or security issues.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaAOPMode.java (2)
109-116: LGTM!The updated paths for Java instrumentation advice and pointcut files look good. The inclusion of the "api" prefix aligns with the new project structure and ensures that the application can locate the files correctly.
183-183: LGTM!The updated path for the main configuration file looks good. The inclusion of the "api" prefix aligns with the new project structure and ensures that the application can locate the file correctly.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (12)
1-1: LGTM!The change in package name is acceptable and suggests a potential shift towards a more API-focused structure.
7-8: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
10-22: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
23-33: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
34-41: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
42-45: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
47-59: LGTM!The pointcuts in this section remain unchanged and are formatted consistently with the rest of the file.
Line range hint
61-71: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
72-82: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
83-96: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
97-106: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcut.
Line range hint
107-224: LGTM!The formatting changes improve readability without altering the functionality of the pointcuts in this section.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java (6)
44-44: LGTM!The change in the package name reflects the updated organizational structure of the codebase.
80-80: LGTM!The change from an exact match to a prefix check using
startsWithallows for more flexible call stack validation.
100-100: LGTM!The change from an exact match to a prefix check using
startsWithallows for more flexible call stack validation.
122-147: LGTM!The changes to the
variableToPathmethod simplify the control flow, enhance readability, and improve error handling while maintaining the same functionality.
160-162: LGTM!Normalizing the path and using
startsWithfor comparison ensures consistent and flexible path validation.
214-217: LGTM!The new check for the
aopModesetting introduces a useful control flow that can prevent unnecessary processing based on configuration settings.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java (3)
122-147: LGTM: Refactoring improves code quality.The refactoring of the
variableToPathmethod from a switch expression to if-else statements enhances the readability and maintainability of the code. The explicit checks for each supported type (Path,String,File) make the code easier to understand. The handling of null values and unsupported types by throwing anInvalidPathExceptionimproves the robustness of the method.Overall, this refactoring is a positive change that improves the code quality without introducing any functional changes.
160-160: LGTM: Path normalization and conversion improves comparison accuracy.The addition of path normalization and conversion to an absolute path before comparing with the allowed paths is a positive change. It ensures that the comparison is performed on a consistent representation of the path, reducing the chances of false negatives or false positives due to relative paths or path traversals.
This change improves the accuracy and reliability of the path comparison in the
checkIfPathIsAllowedmethod.
162-162: LGTM: Transforming allowed path improves comparison consistency.The transformation of the allowed path using the
variableToPathmethod before comparing with the path to check is a positive change. It ensures that both the allowed path and the path to check are normalized and converted to absolute paths, providing a consistent representation for accurate comparison.This change improves the accuracy and reliability of the path comparison in the
checkIfPathIsAllowedmethod by reducing the chances of false negatives or false positives due to inconsistent path representations.src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj (5)
27-27: LGTM!The package name update in the
Class.forNamemethod aligns with the overall package refactoring.
89-114: LGTM!The refactoring of the
variableToPathmethod improves readability and maintainability without altering the functionality.
127-129: LGTM!The normalization of
pathToCheckand the use ofstartsWithfor comparison improve the accuracy and robustness of the path validation logic.
174-177: LGTM!The addition of the
aopModecheck enhances performance and adherence to configuration by skipping unnecessary file system interaction checks when the mode is not set to "ASPECTJ".
203-209: LGTM!The package name update in the pointcut definitions aligns with the overall package refactoring and maintains consistency.
Also applies to: 214-220, 225-231, 236-238
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (5)
23-26: LGTM!The imports are necessary and appropriate.
Line range hint
123-145: Validation checks enhance security.The added validation checks in the constructor ensure that critical modes (
javaBuildMode,javaArchitectureMode,javaAOPMode) are not null before proceeding. This enhances the security and robustness of the object construction process.Throwing a
SecurityExceptionwith clear error messages is an appropriate way to handle security-related validation failures.
147-161: Validation checks enhance security.The added validation checks in the constructor ensure that critical properties derived from the security policy (
packageName,mainClassInPackageName,resourceAccesses,testClasses) are not null. This enhances the security and robustness of the object construction process.Throwing a
SecurityExceptionwith clear error messages is an appropriate way to handle security-related validation failures.
167-177: LGTM!The
functionClassesarray is initialized with a predefined list of class names related to AOP and instrumentation functionality. The initialization looks good.
328-338: Enhancements to security test case execution.Setting the Java advice configuration values using
JavaSecurityTestCase.setJavaAdviceSettingValueprovides granular control over the execution environment. This allows for more targeted security testing based on the specific configuration values.Combining
testClassesandfunctionClassesinto a single array forallowedListedClassesensures that both test classes and function classes are considered during the security tests, providing a more comprehensive coverage.Executing the architecture test cases and AOP security test cases based on the configured settings ensures that the security tests are run according to the desired configuration.
...de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...se/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathAdvice.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...e/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…on' into feature/archrule-command-execution # Conflicts: # src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdvice.java (1)
1-21: LGTM! The class structure and instrumentation logic are well-implemented.The
JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdviceclass effectively utilizes Byte Buddy's instrumentation capabilities to monitor file system interactions during object instantiation. TheonEntermethod captures the required metadata and passes it to thecheckFileSystemInteractionmethod for further processing.Suggestions:
- Consider adding comments to explain the purpose and behavior of the class. This will help future maintainers understand its role in the codebase.
- Evaluate the performance impact of the instrumentation and consider providing configuration options to enable/disable it if needed. This will allow flexibility in balancing monitoring requirements with application performance.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvice.java (1)
12-19: Consider adding comments to clarify the purpose and behavior of thecheckFileSystemInteractionmethod.The
checkFileSystemInteractionmethod seems to play a crucial role in monitoring or logging file system interactions. To improve code readability and maintainability, consider adding comments that explain the purpose, expected behavior, and any side effects of this method.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (23)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaAOPMode.java (4 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/JavaInstrumentationAgent.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathMethodAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathMethodAdvice.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathMethodAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java (6 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java (6 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java (6 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvice.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathMethodAdvice.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathMethodAdvice.java (3 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathConstructorAdvice.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathMethodAdvice.java (2 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java (6 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java (5 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (5)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvice.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathMethodAdvice.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathMethodAdvice.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathMethodAdvice.java
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathMethodAdvice.java
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/JavaAOPMode.java
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/securitytest/java/JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder.java
Additional comments not posted (47)
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathConstructorAdvice.java (1)
5-21: LGTM! The advice class is well-structured and serves a clear purpose.This class defines a Byte Buddy advice method
onEnterthat intercepts constructor calls and checks if they involve any file system read operations. It captures the declaring type name and constructor arguments, passing them to theJavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.checkFileSystemInteractionmethod for further processing.This setup enables monitoring, logging, or validating file access within the application, specifically focusing on read operations triggered by constructor calls.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdvice.java (2)
5-21: Class follows single responsibility principle.The
JavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdviceclass is well-designed and focused on a single responsibility of instrumenting constructors for deletion operations. The class name clearly conveys its purpose, and it contains a single public method, adhering to the single responsibility principle.
7-20: Method is well-designed and focused.The
onEntermethod is well-designed and focused on its purpose of capturing constructor information and invoking thecheckFileSystemInteractionutility method. The method is triggered at the appropriate point (constructor entry) and captures the necessary information (declaring type name and parameters) to pass to the utility method. The method adheres to the single responsibility principle and is easy to understand.src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvice.java (2)
5-5: LGTM!The class
JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvicefollows the Java naming convention and has a single responsibility of providing instrumentation advice for constructor execution. The class structure adheres to SOLID principles.
7-20: LGTM!The
onEntermethod is correctly implemented as an instrumentation advice method. It captures the relevant information about the constructor execution and delegates the processing to theJavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.checkFileSystemInteractionmethod with appropriate arguments.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationReadPathConstructorAdvice.java (2)
5-5: LGTM!The class is properly declared as public and the name
JavaInstrumentationReadPathConstructorAdviceis descriptive, following the Java naming convention for classes.
7-20: LGTM!The
onEntermethod is properly implemented to capture the declaring type name and constructor arguments using the@Advice.Originand@Advice.AllArgumentsannotations respectively.The method invokes
JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.checkFileSystemInteractionwith the appropriate arguments to check for file system interactions labeled as "read" before the constructor's body is executed.The implementation looks good and serves the purpose of intercepting and logging file system access attempts during object instantiation.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdvice.java (1)
1-21: Approve the addition of theJavaInstrumentationExecutePathConstructorAdviceclass.The class implements an advice method using Byte Buddy to instrument constructors and monitor file system interactions. The functionality is well-structured and can enhance tracing and debugging capabilities for file system-related operations triggered by constructors.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdvice.java (1)
1-21: LGTM! The class provides a clean and focused implementation for monitoring file system interactions during object instantiation.The
JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathConstructorAdviceclass leverages Byte Buddy's advice mechanism to intercept constructor calls and monitor file system interactions. Here are some key observations:
- The
onEntermethod is triggered when entering a constructor, capturing the declaring type name and constructor parameters.- It invokes the
checkFileSystemInteractionmethod fromJavaInstrumentationAdviceToolboxwith specific arguments to perform the necessary checks and actions.- The method arguments include the action type ("overwrite"), declaring type name, method name (""), an empty string, an empty object array, and the constructor parameters.
This implementation provides a clean and focused way to monitor and potentially control file system interactions during object instantiation, enhancing Java instrumentation capabilities.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdvice.java (2)
7-7: LGTM!The class is well-named, follows Java naming conventions, and serves a clear purpose as an AOP advice class for instrumenting constructors related to deleting paths.
9-22: LGTM!The
onEntermethod is well-implemented and serves its purpose as an advice method for intercepting constructor calls related to file deletion operations. The method captures the necessary information using Byte Buddy's annotations and invokes the appropriate method fromJavaInstrumentationAdviceToolboxto perform checks related to file system interactions.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/JavaInstrumentationAgent.java (3)
26-26: LGTM!The change in the method name from
createReadPathBindingtocreateReadPathMethodBindingaligns with the refactoring effort to distinguish between method and constructor bindings. The code change looks good.
27-29: LGTM!The changes in the method names to include "Method" are consistent with the refactoring effort to distinguish between method and constructor bindings. The code changes look good.
31-34: Verify the impact of the new constructor bindings.The addition of new constructor bindings aligns with the refactoring effort to separate method and constructor bindings. The naming convention is consistent with the changes made to the method bindings.
Please ensure that the new constructor bindings are thoroughly tested to verify their impact on the instrumentation behavior.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvice.java (2)
1-1: LGTM!The package declaration change is consistent with the file path and reflects a potential reorganization of the codebase within the API context.
17-17: Verify the impact of the class name change.The class name change enhances clarity regarding the class's role in the Java instrumentation framework, particularly in relation to method execution security checks.
Please ensure that all references to the old class name
JavaInstrumentationDeletePathAdvicehave been updated to the new class nameJavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvicethroughout the codebase.Run the following script to verify the class name usage:
Verification successful
Class name change verified and implemented correctly.
The class name change from
JavaInstrumentationDeletePathAdvicetoJavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvicehas been successfully implemented across the codebase. This change appears to be part of a broader refactoring to distinguish between method and constructor advices, as evidenced by the presence of bothJavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdviceandJavaInstrumentationDeletePathConstructorAdviceclasses.While automated checks show no remaining references to the old class name, it's recommended to perform a final manual review to ensure no edge cases were missed, particularly in configuration files or documentation that may not have been captured by the code search.
Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify all references to the class have been updated to match the new name. # Test: Search for the old class name. Expect: No occurrences of the old class name. rg --type java $'JavaInstrumentationDeletePathAdvice'Length of output: 52
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the class name change and rg functionality # Test 1: Search for the new class name echo "Searching for new class name:" rg --type java $'JavaInstrumentationDeletePathMethodAdvice' # Test 2: Verify rg functionality by searching for a common Java keyword echo "Verifying rg functionality:" rg --type java $'public class' # Test 3: Search for partial matches of the old class name echo "Searching for partial matches of old class name:" rg --type java $'JavaInstrumentationDeletePath'Length of output: 26178
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathMethodAdvice.java (3)
1-1: LGTM!The change in the package declaration is appropriate and aligns with the project's structure.
6-6: LGTM!The static import statement for
net.bytebuddy.asm.Advice.*is appropriate and can improve code readability.
Line range hint
17-75: LGTM!The changes to the class name and the string argument in the
onEntermethod are appropriate and enhance clarity regarding the class's purpose and functionality.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/advice/JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathMethodAdvice.java (2)
20-20: LGTM!The class name change from
JavaInstrumentationOverwritePathAdvicetoJavaInstrumentationOverwritePathMethodAdviceimproves clarity and specificity. The new name accurately conveys that the advice is related to methods that overwrite paths.
78-78: The parameter change enhances the specificity of the security check.Changing the string parameter from "write" to "overwrite" in the call to
JavaInstrumentationAdviceToolbox.checkFileSystemInteractionis a good improvement. It shifts the focus of the security check to specifically target the action of overwriting files, rather than general writing operations.This change may have implications for how file system interactions are monitored and controlled, potentially providing more fine-grained security policies related to overwriting files.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java (5)
1-1: LGTM!The package declaration change aligns with the restructuring of the package hierarchy to better delineate API components. This change does not introduce any functional or logical issues.
40-40: LGTM!The added Javadoc comment improves the documentation of the
getClassesMatchermethod by clarifying the return value in the case of an empty map. This change does not introduce any functional or logical issues.
58-76: LGTM!The new
getConstructorsMatchermethod provides a specific matcher for constructors, which was not present in the previous version of the code. The logic correctly handles the case when the methods list is empty or does not contain constructors by returningElementMatchers.none(). If the constructor is present in the methods list, the method returnsElementMatchers.isConstructor()to match constructors. This addition aligns with the summary provided in the AI-generated summary and does not introduce any functional or logical issues.
78-113: LGTM!The modifications to the
getMethodsMatchermethod enhance its functionality by providing more precise matching capabilities for methods, excluding constructors. The logic correctly handles the case when the methods list is empty or does not contain methods (excluding constructors) by returningElementMatchers.none(). If methods (excluding constructors) are present in the methods list, the method returns a matcher based on the method names usingElementMatchers.namedOneOf(). These changes align with the summary provided in the AI-generated summary and do not introduce any functional or logical issues.
126-136: LGTM!The additions to the
methodsWhichCanReadFilesmap expand the set of methods considered as file read operations. The added methods forinstrumentation.io.RandomAccessFile,java.nio.file.Files, andjava.io.FileReaderare relevant to file read operations and align with the purpose of the map. These changes do not introduce any functional or logical issues.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationPointcutDefinitions.java (5)
41-41: LGTM!The comment accurately describes the behavior of the
getClassesMatchermethod when the provided map is empty.
59-77: LGTM!The
getConstructorsMatchermethod is correctly implemented to match constructors based on the provided map. It enhances the functionality of the class by providing a way to match constructors for instrumentation.
79-115: LGTM!The changes in the
getMethodsMatchermethod improve the precision of method matching for instrumentation by filtering out constructors. The updated Javadoc comment accurately describes the behavior of the method.
124-140: LGTM!The changes in the
methodsWhichCanReadFilesmap improve clarity and correctness by replacing references toinstrumentation.ioclasses withjava.ioclasses. Adding new entries forjava.io.FileReaderandjava.io.BufferedReaderexpands the recognized methods for file reading operations, enhancing the utility of the class.
Line range hint
151-188: LGTM!The changes in the
methodsWhichCanOverwriteFilesmap improve clarity and correctness by replacing references toinstrumentation.ioclasses withjava.ioclasses. Introducing themethodsWhichCanDeleteFilesmap enhances the functionality of the class by recognizing file deletion methods. These changes collectively improve the utility of the class.src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java (6)
1-12: LGTM!The package name and import statements have been updated to reflect the new package structure. The changes follow a consistent naming convention and ensure that the required classes are imported from the correct package.
50-68: LGTM!The
createMethodBindingmethod is a well-documented private utility method that creates a binding for the given type description, class loader, pointcuts, and advice. The method signature and logic are clear, and the exception handling ensures that aSecurityExceptionis thrown with a specific error message if the binding creation fails.
70-79: LGTM!The
createConstructorBindingmethod is a well-documented private utility method that creates a binding for constructors based on the given type description, class loader, pointcuts, and advice. The method signature and logic are clear and consistent with thecreateMethodBindingmethod, and the exception handling ensures that aSecurityExceptionis thrown with a specific error message if the binding creation fails.
126-139: LGTM!The
createReadPathMethodBindingandcreateReadPathConstructorBindingmethods are well-documented public methods that create bindings for the read path pointcut for methods and constructors, respectively. The method signatures and logic are clear, and they use the appropriatecreate*Bindingmethod to create the binding based on whether it's for methods or constructors. The exception handling ensures that aSecurityExceptionis thrown with a specific error message if the binding creation fails.Also applies to: 141-154
172-185: LGTM!The
createOverwritePathMethodBinding,createOverwritePathConstructorBinding,createExecutePathMethodBinding,createExecutePathConstructorBinding,createDeletePathMethodBinding, andcreateDeletePathConstructorBindingmethods are well-documented public methods that create bindings for the overwrite, execute, and delete path pointcuts for methods and constructors. The method signatures and logic are consistent with thecreateReadPath*Bindingmethods, and they use the appropriatecreate*Bindingmethod to create the binding based on whether it's for methods or constructors. The exception handling ensures that aSecurityExceptionis thrown with a specific error message if the binding creation fails.Also applies to: 188-202, 220-233, 235-248, 266-279, 281-294
Line range hint
1-297: Overall, the changes made to theJavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.javafile are excellent!The file is well-structured and follows a consistent pattern for creating bindings for different pointcuts. The methods are well-documented with clear explanations of their purpose and behavior. The introduction of separate methods for handling constructor bindings enhances the clarity and modularity of the code. The exception handling is consistent throughout the file, ensuring that specific error messages are thrown when binding creation fails.
The changes improve the organization and readability of the file while maintaining a high level of consistency in terms of method signatures, logic, and exception handling.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/instrumentation/pointcut/JavaInstrumentationBindingDefinitions.java (10)
58-68: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding by loading the toolbox and applying the advice to the matched methods. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing a
SecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
70-79: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding by loading the toolbox and applying the advice to the matched constructors. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing a
SecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
126-139: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the read path pointcut for methods by calling the
createMethodBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
141-154: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the read path pointcut for constructors by calling the
createConstructorBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
172-185: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the overwrite path pointcut for methods by calling the
createMethodBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
188-202: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the overwrite path pointcut for constructors by calling the
createConstructorBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
220-233: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the execute path pointcut for methods by calling the
createMethodBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
235-249: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the execute path pointcut for constructors by calling the
createConstructorBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
266-279: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the delete path pointcut for methods by calling the
createMethodBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
281-295: LGTM!The method correctly creates the binding for the delete path pointcut for constructors by calling the
createConstructorBindingmethod with the appropriate parameters. It also handles exceptions appropriately by throwing aSecurityExceptionwith a specific message.
…tream.write(), as they are used to write error messages to the console. 2. instrumentation -> java
sarpsahinalp
changed the title
Ares: ArchUnit Command Execution
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/PathAccessTest.java (2)
20-22: LGTM!The field declaration and annotation seem to be correct. However, consider adding a comment to explain the purpose of the
@UserTestResultsannotation for better code readability.
63-74: LGTM!The addition of the new test method
test_accessPathNormalInstrumentationis a good enhancement to test the functionality with a different security policy. The implementation is correct and consistent with the existing test.Address the TODO comment.
Consider addressing the TODO comment about checking the correctness of the exception message to ensure the test is comprehensive.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (4)
- .github/workflows/maven.yml (1 hunks)
- pom.xml (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/PathAccessTest.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- pom.xml
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml
Additional comments not posted (1)
.github/workflows/maven.yml (1)
34-36: Approved: Separating build and test processes can improve workflow efficiency.The changes introduce a clear separation between the build process and the testing process by splitting the original command into two separate commands:
mvn -B package --file pom.xml -DskipTestsbuilds the project while skipping the tests.mvn testruns the tests after the build.This separation can be beneficial in scenarios where the build process is time-consuming, and running tests separately can provide faster feedback on build failures.
However, please ensure that the tests are still run and not accidentally skipped in the workflow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 9
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml (1)
1-1: Fix the new line character issue flagged by yamllint.The static analysis tool yamllint has flagged an error about the wrong new line character. It expects the file to use the
\ncharacter for new lines.To fix this issue, ensure that the file uses the
\ncharacter for new lines instead of other characters like\r\n. This can be done by configuring your text editor to use Unix-style line endings.However, please note that this is a minor issue and does not affect the functionality of the configuration file.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (1)
124-127: Consider moving object-related methods to a separate pointcut.The added methods,
equals,hashCode, andtoString, are related to object equality comparison, hash code generation, and string representation, respectively. While they are commonly used, they are not directly related to file system execution.Consider moving these methods to a separate pointcut specifically for object-related operations to maintain a clear separation of concerns.
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/PathAccessTest.java (1)
132-132: Include informative messages infail()callsIn
test_accessPathNormalAspectJ, thefail()method is called without an error message, which can make debugging test failures more challenging.Add an informative message to the
fail()call to clarify why the test failed.Apply this diff:
- fail(); + fail("Expected a SecurityException to be thrown");
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (22)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj (6 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (9 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj (6 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (10 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/PathAccessTest.java (3 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/PathAccessUser.java (4 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/TrustedClassesUser.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/fileSystem/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/pathaccess/PathAccessPenguin.java (0 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (0 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student/FileSystemAccessPenguin2.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml (0 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml (0 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml (1 hunks)
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml (1 hunks)
Files not reviewed due to no reviewable changes (4)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/pathaccess/PathAccessPenguin.java
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowed.yaml
- src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentation.yaml
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemAdviceDefinitions.aj
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/CommandExecutionUser.java
Additional context used
yamllint
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
Additional comments not posted (58)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student/FileSystemAccessPenguin2.java (1)
1-24: Promising start for a file system access test class!The
FileSystemAccessPenguin2class has been created with a clear purpose of testing Ares' ability to detect and handle file system access correctly. The imported classes suggest a wide range of potential testing scenarios, including file system operations, MIDI, Swing, and logging.To further develop this class:
- Implement relevant test methods and logic to cover the desired file system access scenarios.
- Review the imported classes to ensure they align with the intended testing scope and remove any unused imports.
- Consider adding comments or documentation to explain the test cases and their expected outcomes.
Keep up the good work on enhancing the test coverage for file system access!
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/TrustedClassesUser.java (2)
6-6: LGTM!The import statement change from
PathAccessPenguintoFileSystemAccessPenguinaligns with the overall objective of enhancing file system operations. This change is consistent with the list of alterations provided and is unlikely to have any negative impact on the functionality or security of the code.
24-24: LGTM!The method call change from
PathAccessPenguin.accessPath(PATH)toFileSystemAccessPenguin.accessPath(PATH)is consistent with the import statement change and aligns with the overall objective of enhancing file system operations. This change is unlikely to have any negative impact on the functionality or security of the code and is unlikely to introduce any compilation errors or runtime exceptions.src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy configuration follows a clear and structured approach.The YAML file defines a well-structured security policy for a Java application using Maven, ArchUnit, and AspectJ. It specifies the programming language, package, main class, test classes, permitted resource accesses, and package imports.
The policy allows deletion of files specifically for "pom.xml" while denying other file system interactions. It also denies network connections, command executions, and thread creations. The allowed package imports cover standard Java packages.
Overall, the security policy aims to control the interactions and dependencies within the application effectively.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy configuration is well-structured and comprehensive.The YAML file defines a clear and detailed security policy for the Java application. It specifies the programming language, package, main class, test classes, and permitted resource accesses. The configuration covers essential aspects such as file system interactions, network connections, command executions, thread creations, and package imports.
The file allows execution of files on the specific path "pom.xml" while restricting other file operations, which helps in preventing unauthorized actions. The allowed package imports ensure that only necessary libraries are accessible.
Overall, the configuration enforces strict security constraints, which is crucial for maintaining the application's security.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy configuration follows a structured format and defines appropriate permissions.The YAML file effectively outlines the security policy for the Java application by specifying the programming language, package, main class, test classes, and permitted resource accesses. The file system interactions, network connections, command executions, thread creations, and package imports are clearly defined, ensuring controlled access to resources.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy is well-structured and comprehensive.The YAML file defines a comprehensive security policy for the Java application, covering various aspects such as:
- Programming language configuration and package structure
- Designation of test classes
- Restrictions on file system interactions, network connections, command executions, and thread creations
- Allowed package imports
The structured approach helps maintain a secure environment by controlling the application's interactions and dependencies.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
[error] 33-33: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml (2)
21-22: Verify the impact of allowing deletion of thepom.xmlfile.Allowing deletion of the
pom.xmlfile could potentially disrupt the Maven build process and cause issues with dependency management. Please ensure that this permission is intentional and does not introduce unintended consequences.
18-20: Verify the impact of prohibiting file system interactions on the application's functionality.The policy prohibits reading, overwriting, or executing any files, which limits the application's ability to interact with the file system. Please ensure that these restrictions do not hinder any necessary functionalities of the application.
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml (1)
1-33: The configuration file is well-structured and provides a secure environment for supervised code execution.The YAML file clearly defines the programming language, package, main class, test classes, and permitted resource accesses. The restrictions on file system interactions, network connections, command executions, and thread creations help mitigate potential security risks. The allowed package imports provide access to standard Java libraries while preventing the use of potentially dangerous packages.
Overall, the configuration file is well-designed and contributes to a secure and controlled execution environment.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy is well-structured and comprehensive.The YAML file defines a clear and detailed security policy for the Java application. It specifies the main class, test classes, and permitted resource accesses in a structured manner. The file system interactions, network connections, command executions, thread creations, and package imports are properly configured to ensure the application adheres to the defined security constraints while allowing necessary functionalities.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml (1)
1-33: The security policy is well-structured and comprehensive.The YAML file defines a clear and detailed security policy for the Java application. It covers essential aspects such as file system interactions, network connections, command executions, thread creations, and package imports. The policy strikes a good balance between allowing necessary operations (e.g., overwriting files) while restricting potentially dangerous actions (e.g., reading, executing, deleting files). The allowed package imports are reasonable and cover common Java libraries.
Overall, the security policy is well-defined and provides a solid foundation for securing the application.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/PathAccessUser.java (8)
16-16: LGTM!The import change from
PathAccessPenguintoFileSystemAccessPenguinlooks good. It suggests an update or replacement of the class used for handling file system access in the test cases.
43-43: LGTM!The method call change from
PathAccessPenguin.accessPathtoFileSystemAccessPenguin.accessPathis consistent with the import statement update. The change looks good.
47-49: LGTM!The changes to the
@Policyannotation and the method call fromPathAccessPenguin.accessPathtoFileSystemAccessPenguin.accessPathlook good. The policy file path update suggests a change in the security policy being applied to the test case, which is fine.
53-55: The changes are similar to the previous code segment at lines 47-49 and have already been reviewed.
61-61: LGTM!The method call change from
PathAccessPenguin.askForFilePermissiontoFileSystemAccessPenguin.askForFilePermissionis consistent with the import statement update. The change looks good.
68-68: The change is similar to the previous code segment at line 61 and has already been reviewed.
80-80: The changes are similar to the previous code segments at lines 43, 49, 55, 61, 68 and have already been reviewed.Also applies to: 86-86, 92-92, 99-99, 106-106, 113-113
123-123: The change is similar to the previous code segments at lines 43, 49, 55, 80, 86 and has already been reviewed.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/fileSystem/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (17)
18-20: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
22-24: Skipped review.The method is commented out and does not contain any functional code.
31-38: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
43-60: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
65-71: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
76-83: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
88-95: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
100-107: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
112-119: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
124-130: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
137-144: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
149-160: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
165-171: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
176-186: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
191-198: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
203-210: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
215-222: LGTM!The method logic is correct, and the implementation is accurate.
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (11)
1-1: LGTM!The package declaration change is consistent and suggests a broader API focus for the aspect.
Line range hint
7-19: LGTM!The addition of
normalizedListto thefileReadMethodspointcut is consistent with the purpose of the pointcut and expands its scope appropriately.
Line range hint
21-36: LGTM!The additions to the
fileWriteMethodspointcut, includingmkdirand various write methods fromjava.niopackages, enhance its coverage of file write operations and are consistent with the pointcut's purpose.
38-45: LGTM!The additions to the
fileExecuteMethodspointcut, includingrenameTo,toPath,toURI, andmkdirs, expand its scope appropriately to cover additional file execution operations.
50-62: LGTM!The new pointcuts for initialization methods of various file-related classes are well-defined, target specific classes and methods, and suggest an increased focus on tracking their usage. The additions are syntactically correct and appropriate.
Line range hint
64-74: LGTM!The expansion of the
filesReadMethodspointcut to include additional read methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass enhances its coverage of file read operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.
Line range hint
75-85: LGTM!The expansion of the
filesWriteMethodspointcut to include additional write methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass enhances its coverage of file write operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.
Line range hint
86-99: LGTM!The expansion of the
filesExecuteMethodspointcut to include additional execution methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass enhances its coverage of file execution operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.
Line range hint
100-108: LGTM!The expansion of the
filesDeleteMethodspointcut to include additional delete methods and file property checks from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass enhances its coverage of file deletion operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.
Line range hint
110-118: LGTM!The expansion of the
fileSystemReadMethodspointcut to include additional read methods from thejava.nio.file.FileSystemclass enhances its coverage of file system read operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.
120-122: LGTM!The expansion of the
fileSystemWriteMethodspointcut to includenewWatchServiceandclosemethods from thejava.nio.file.FileSystemclass enhances its coverage of file system write operations and is consistent with the pointcut's purpose. The changes are syntactically correct.src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (8)
Line range hint
7-19: LGTM!The addition of
java.io.RandomAccessFile.read(..)enhances the pointcut to capture more read operations on files. The changes look good.
Line range hint
21-36: LGTM!The addition of new method calls such as
java.nio.channels.FileChannel.write(..),java.nio.file.Files.write(..),java.nio.file.Files.newBufferedWriter(..),java.nio.file.Files.newOutputStream(..),java.io.FileOutputStream.write(..), andjava.io.RandomAccessFile.write(..)enhances the pointcut to capture more write operations on files. The changes look good.
38-44: LGTM!The addition of new method calls such as
java.io.File.renameTo(..),java.io.File.toPath(..),java.io.File.toURI(..), andjava.io.File.mkdirs(..)enhances the pointcut to capture more execute operations on files. The changes look good.
54-62: LGTM!The addition of new pointcuts such as
objectStreamClassMethods,randomAccessFileInitMethods,fileTypeDetectorProbeContentTypeMethods,fileImageSourceInitMethods, andimageConsumerQueueInitMethodsenhances the aspect to capture various initialization and method calls related to file handling. The changes look good.
Line range hint
64-108:
Line range hint
110-127:
Line range hint
159-166:
213-232: LGTM!The addition of new pointcuts such as
bufferedReaderInitMethods,scannerInitMethods,fileReaderInitMethods,lineNumberReaderInitMethods,printWriterInitMethods,bufferedWriterInitMethods,outputStreamWriterInitMethods,dataOutputStreamInitMethods,objectOutputStreamInitMethods, andprintStreamInitMethodsenhances the aspect to capture initialization of various file-related classes. The changes look good.src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/PathAccessTest.java (2)
117-118: Verify the correctness of exception assertions intest_accessFileSystemIn
test_accessFileSystem, you assert that aRuntimeExceptionis thrown. Ensure that this is the intended exception type and that the test accurately reflects the expected behavior.Run the following script to check the exceptions thrown by
accessFileSystemmethods:#!/bin/bash # Description: Search for throw statements in accessFileSystem methods rg --type java -A 5 'void accessFileSystem' src/test/ | rg 'throw new'Review the results to confirm that
RuntimeExceptionis the correct exception to expect and adjust your test assertions accordingly.
120-121: Investigate exception type used in catch blocksThe TODO comment indicates uncertainty about catching
RuntimeExceptioninstead ofSecurityException.Run the following script to identify where
RuntimeExceptionandSecurityExceptionare being used in catch blocks. This will help determine ifSecurityExceptionshould be caught instead.Review the output to ensure that the exceptions being caught align with the exceptions expected to be thrown by the methods under test.
Verification successful
RuntimeException Catch Blocks Verified
The verification confirmed that all catch blocks in
PathAccessTest.java(withinsrc/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/) are handlingRuntimeException. NoSecurityExceptioncatch blocks were found.Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find catch blocks with RuntimeException and SecurityException in test classes # Find catch blocks catching RuntimeException rg --type java 'catch *\(RuntimeException' src/test/ # Find catch blocks catching SecurityException rg --type java 'catch *\(SecurityException' src/test/Length of output: 2876
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Find catch blocks with RuntimeException and SecurityException in test classes using ast-grep # Find catch blocks catching RuntimeException ast-grep --lang java --pattern ' try { $$$ } catch (RuntimeException $_) { $$$ } ' src/test/java/ # Find catch blocks catching SecurityException ast-grep --lang java --pattern ' try { $$$ } catch (SecurityException $_) { $$$ } ' src/test/java/Length of output: 34058
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the YAML syntax issues identified by yamllint.
The YAML file has the following issues:
- Wrong new line character at the beginning of the file (expected \n).
- Missing new line character at the end of the file.
Apply this diff to fix the YAML syntax issues:
-
regardingTheSupervisedCode:
+regardingTheSupervisedCode:
theFollowingProgrammingLanguageConfigurationIsUsed: JAVA_USING_MAVEN_ARCHUNIT_AND_ASPECTJ
theProgrammingLanguageUsesTheFollowingPackage: "de.tum.cit.ase.ares"
theMainClassInsideThisPackageIs: "Main"
theFollowingClassesAreTestClasses:
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.securitytest.java.JavaSecurityTestCaseFactoryAndBuilder"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.policy.SecurityPolicyReaderAndDirector"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.jupiter.JupiterSecurityExtension"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.jupiter.UnifiedInvocationInterceptor"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.internal.ReportingUtils"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.jupiter.JupiterTestGuard"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.architecture.java.archunit.postcompile.CustomClassResolver"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.architecture.java.archunit.postcompile.TransitivelyAccessesMethodsCondition$TransitiveAccessPath"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.architecture.java.archunit.postcompile.TransitivelyAccessesMethodsCondition"
- "de.tum.cit.ase.ares.api.architecture.java.archunit.JavaArchUnitSecurityTestCase"
theFollowingResourceAccessesArePermitted:
regardingFileSystemInteractions:
- readAllFiles: false
overwriteAllFiles: false
executeAllFiles: false
deleteAllFiles: true
onThisPathAndAllPathsBelow: "pom.xml"
regardingNetworkConnections: []
regardingCommandExecutions: []
regardingThreadCreations: []
regardingPackageImports:
- importTheFollowingPackage: "java.io"
- importTheFollowingPackage: "java.util"
- importTheFollowingPackage: "java.nio"
- importTheFollowingPackage: "java.net"
- importTheFollowingPackage: "java.awt"
- importTheFollowingPackage: "javax.swing"
- - importTheFollowingPackage: "javax.sound"
+ - importTheFollowingPackage: "javax.sound"
+Also applies to: 33-33
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix new line character issues.
The static analysis tool yamllint has identified the following issues:
- Wrong new line character at the beginning of the file (expected
\n). - No new line character at the end of the file.
To address these issues, please make the following changes:
- Ensure that the file starts with a valid new line character (
\n). - Add a new line character at the end of the file.
These changes will improve the file's consistency and compatibility with YAML standards.
Also applies to: 33-33
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the new line character issues.
The static analysis tool yamllint has identified the following issues:
- Wrong new line character at the beginning of the file (expected \n).
- Missing new line character at the end of the file.
To address these issues, apply the following changes:
- Ensure that the file starts with a proper new line character (\n).
- Add a new line character at the end of the file.
Also applies to: 33-33
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the new line character issues.
The yamllint static analysis tool has identified the following issues:
- Line 1: Wrong new line character. Expected
\n. - Line 33: No new line character at the end of the file.
To address these issues, apply the following changes:
- Ensure that the file uses
\n(LF) as the new line character instead of\r\n(CRLF). - Add a new line character at the end of the file.
You can use a text editor or IDE that supports configuring the line endings to make these changes.
Also applies to: 33-33
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the new line character.
The static analysis tool yamllint has flagged an error regarding the new line character. It expects the file to use the \n character for new lines.
To fix this issue, ensure that the file uses the \n character for new lines instead of any other character. You can use a text editor or IDE that supports converting line endings to Unix-style (\n).
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ | |||
| regardingTheSupervisedCode: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the new line character.
The static analysis tool yamllint has flagged an error regarding the new line character. It expects the file to use the \n (LF) character for new lines.
Please ensure that the file uses the correct new line character (\n) consistently throughout the file. This can be done by configuring your text editor or IDE to use the appropriate line endings for the file.
Tools
yamllint
[error] 1-1: wrong new line character: expected \n
(new-lines)
| void test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile(); | ||
| fail(); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Refactor repetitive test methods using parameterized tests
Multiple test methods in ReadOperations, such as test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadAspectJ and test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadInstrumentation, share similar structures and code.
To reduce duplication and enhance maintainability, consider using parameterized tests with JUnit 5. This allows you to run the same test logic with different inputs.
Here's an example of how you might refactor these tests:
@ParameterizedTest
@CsvSource({
"accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile, src/test/resources/.../OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml, test-classes/.../student",
"accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile, src/test/resources/.../OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml, test-classes/.../student",
// Add other methods and policies as needed
})
void test_accessFileSystemReadOperations(String methodName, String policyPath, String withinPath) {
// Dynamically set the policy annotation if necessary
// For illustration purposes; actual implementation may vary
Policy policyAnnotation = this.getClass().getAnnotation(Policy.class);
// Invoke the method dynamically
try {
Method method = FileSystemAccessPenguin.class.getMethod(methodName);
method.invoke(null);
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
// Expected exception
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Unexpected exception: " + e.getMessage());
}
}This refactoring will minimize repeated code and make it easier to manage and extend your tests.
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessPath(Path.of("pom212.xml")); | ||
| fail(); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // TODO: check if the exception message is correct | ||
| // expected | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure correct exception type is caught and assert exception details
In test_accessPathNormalAspectJ, you are catching a RuntimeException, but it seems you might be expecting a SecurityException based on the context. Additionally, calling fail() without an error message can make debugging more difficult.
Consider updating the catch block to catch SecurityException and include assertions to verify the exception. Also, provide an informative message in the fail() method.
Apply this diff to improve the test:
void test_accessPathNormalAspectJ() throws IOException {
try {
FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessPath(Path.of("pom212.xml"));
- fail();
+ fail("Expected a SecurityException to be thrown");
} catch (SecurityException e) {
// Expected exception
+ assertEquals("Expected exception message", e.getMessage());
} catch (Exception e) {
+ fail("Unexpected exception: " + e.getClass().getSimpleName());
}
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaBufferedReaderAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaBufferedReader(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaBufferedReaderInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaBufferedReader(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Standardize exception handling and assertions in tests
In the ReadOperations tests, there is inconsistency in handling exceptions and assertions. Some tests catch RuntimeException, while others may expect SecurityException. Additionally, not all tests provide informative messages in fail() calls.
To improve test clarity and effectiveness:
- Catch the specific exception type expected (
SecurityExceptionif appropriate). - Use assertions to verify exception messages or properties.
- Provide meaningful messages in
fail()calls to aid debugging.
Example adjustment:
try {
FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaBufferedReader();
- fail(errorMessage);
+ fail("Expected a SecurityException to be thrown");
} catch (SecurityException e) {
// Expected exception
+ assertEquals("Expected exception message", e.getMessage());
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Unexpected exception: " + e.getClass().getSimpleName());
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 29
Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (1)
Line range hint
238-250: Address the TODO comment.The TODO comment raises a valid concern about separating the desktop-related methods into different pointcut files for better organization and modularity.
Consider creating a separate issue to track the refactoring of desktop-related methods into separate pointcut files. This will help improve the maintainability and readability of the aspect. Do you want me to open a GitHub issue for this refactoring task?
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/FileSystemAccessTest.java (5)
73-79: Address the commented-out test methodtest_accessPathRelativeGlobDirectChildrenBlacklist.The method is commented out with the note "OUTCOMMENTED: Test does not pass". To maintain code cleanliness and ensure test coverage, please fix the test or remove it if it's no longer needed.
I can help investigate why this test is failing and provide a fix. Would you like me to assist with this?
80-85: Address the commented-out test methodtest_accessPathRelativeGlobDirectChildrenForbidden.This test method is commented out. Consider resolving the issues causing it to fail or remove it if it's obsolete to keep the codebase clean.
I can assist in diagnosing and fixing the issues with this test method. Let me know if you'd like help.
91-97: Address the commented-out test methodtest_accessPathRelativeGlobRecursiveBlacklist.The method is commented out with "OUTCOMMENTED: Test does not pass". Please consider fixing the test so it passes, or remove it if it's no longer relevant.
If you'd like, I can help identify why this test is failing and suggest a solution.
98-103: Address the commented-out test methodtest_accessPathRelativeGlobRecursiveForbidden.This test is currently commented out. To ensure comprehensive test coverage, consider fixing it or removing it if it's no longer necessary.
I'm available to help resolve the issues with this test method. Would you like assistance?
104-109: Address the commented-out test methodtest_accessPathTest.The test method is commented out with "OUTCOMMENTED: Test does not pass". It's important to maintain up-to-date tests. Please fix the test or remove it if it's outdated.
I can help troubleshoot this test and provide a fix. Let me know if you'd like support.
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (5)
- src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (9 hunks)
- src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (10 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/FileSystemAccessTest.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/FileSystemAccessUser.java (4 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/fileSystem/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (32)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/FileSystemAccessUser.java (5)
16-16: LGTM!The updated import statement aligns with the class rename and the shift in the underlying functionality related to file system access.
24-24: LGTM!The class rename provides clarity and aligns with the updated functionality related to file system access. The class-level annotations and structure remain consistent.
43-43: LGTM!The method call updates from
PathAccessPenguintoFileSystemAccessPenguinalign with the shift in the underlying functionality related to file system access. The associated policy path changes, particularly fromOnePathAllowed.yamltoOnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml, suggest a modification in the security policy being tested, focusing on read permissions using AspectJ. The test methods maintain their original functionality while utilizing the newFileSystemAccessPenguinclass for file access operations.Also applies to: 49-49, 55-55, 61-61, 68-68
80-80: LGTM!The method call updates from
PathAccessPenguintoFileSystemAccessPenguinalign with the shift in the underlying functionality related to file system access. The test methods maintain their original functionality of accessing paths using relative glob patterns and testing permissions while utilizing the newFileSystemAccessPenguinclass for file access operations.Also applies to: 86-86, 92-92, 99-99, 106-106, 113-113
123-123: LGTM!The method call update from
PathAccessPenguintoFileSystemAccessPenguinaligns with the shift in the underlying functionality related to file system access. The test method maintains its original functionality of accessing a specific test file and verifying its existence while utilizing the newFileSystemAccessPenguinclass for file access operations.src/main/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/templates/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (11)
1-1: LGTM!The package declaration change is consistent and suggests a broader API focus for the pointcut definitions.
Line range hint
7-19: LGTM!The addition of
java.io.File.normalizedList(..)method to thefileReadMethodspointcut is consistent and expands the scope of file reading operations captured by the pointcut.
Line range hint
21-36: LGTM!The addition of new methods to the
fileWriteMethodspointcut is consistent and expands the scope of file writing operations captured by the pointcut.
38-45: LGTM!The addition of new methods to the
fileExecuteMethodspointcut is consistent and expands the scope of file execution operations captured by the pointcut.
50-62: LGTM!The new pointcut definitions for capturing initialization methods of file handling classes and specific file-related operations are well-defined and follow the naming convention of the aspect.
Line range hint
64-78: LGTM!The addition of new methods to the
filesReadMethodspointcut is consistent and expands the scope of file reading operations captured by the pointcut.
Line range hint
80-89: LGTM!The new
filesWriteMethodspointcut definition is well-defined, follows the naming convention, and captures relevant file writing methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass.
Line range hint
91-103: LGTM!The new
filesExecuteMethodspointcut definition is well-defined, follows the naming convention, and captures relevant file execution methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass.
Line range hint
105-113: LGTM!The new
filesDeleteMethodspointcut definition is well-defined, follows the naming convention, and captures relevant file deletion methods from thejava.nio.file.Filesclass.
Line range hint
115-123: LGTM!The new
fileSystemReadMethodspointcut definition is well-defined, follows the naming convention, and captures relevant file system reading methods from thejava.nio.file.FileSystemclass.
Line range hint
125-236: LGTM!The new pointcut definitions for capturing various file system, file channel, file writer, file handler, and MIDI system operations, as well as initialization methods for file handling classes, are well-defined and follow the naming convention of the aspect.
src/main/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/api/aop/java/aspectj/adviceandpointcut/JavaAspectJFileSystemPointcutDefinitions.aj (16)
Line range hint
7-19: LGTM!The addition of
java.io.RandomAccessFile.read(..)to thefileReadMethodspointcut is consistent with the purpose of capturing file read operations.
Line range hint
21-36: LGTM!The additions to the
fileWriteMethodspointcut, including methods fromjava.nio.channels.FileChannel,java.nio.file.Files,java.io.FileOutputStream, andjava.io.RandomAccessFile, are consistent with the purpose of capturing file write operations.
38-45: LGTM!The
fileExecuteMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file execution operations.
46-48: LGTM!The
fileDeleteMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file deletion operations.
50-50: LGTM!The
fileInputStreamInitMethodspointcut correctly captures the initialization ofjava.io.FileInputStream.
52-52: LGTM!The
fileOutputStreamInitMethodspointcut correctly captures the initialization ofjava.io.FileOutputStream.
54-54: LGTM!The
objectStreamClassMethodspointcut correctly captures calls tojava.io.ObjectStreamClass.getField(..).
56-56: LGTM!The
randomAccessFileInitMethodspointcut correctly captures the initialization ofjava.io.RandomAccessFile.
58-58: LGTM!The
fileTypeDetectorProbeContentTypeMethodspointcut correctly captures calls tojava.nio.file.spi.FileTypeDetector.probeContentType(..).
60-60: LGTM!The
fileImageSourceInitMethodspointcut correctly captures the initialization ofsun.awt.image.FileImageSource.
62-62: LGTM!The
imageConsumerQueueInitMethodspointcut correctly captures the initialization ofsun.awt.image.ImageConsumerQueue.
Line range hint
64-78: LGTM!The
filesReadMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file read operations fromjava.nio.file.Files,java.io.DataInputStream,java.io.ObjectInputStream, andjava.io.InputStreamReader.
Line range hint
80-89: LGTM!The
filesWriteMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file write operations fromjava.nio.file.Files.
Line range hint
91-103: LGTM!The
filesExecuteMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file execution operations fromjava.nio.file.Files.
Line range hint
105-113: LGTM!The
filesDeleteMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file deletion operations fromjava.nio.file.Files.
Line range hint
115-123: LGTM!The
fileSystemReadMethodspointcut correctly captures the relevant file system read operations fromjava.nio.file.FileSystem.
| public static void askForFilePermission(String path) { | ||
| //REMOVED: Checking Permission of the system's SecurityManager for "read" | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The method 'askForFilePermission' lacks implementation.
The askForFilePermission method currently contains no functional code and only has a comment indicating that permission checking was removed. If this method is no longer needed, consider removing it to keep the codebase clean. Otherwise, implement the necessary permission checks or provide documentation on its intended use.
| try { | ||
| Scanner scanner = new Scanner(new File("pom123.xml")); | ||
| scanner.nextLine(); | ||
| } catch (Exception e) { | ||
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Potential resource leak: 'Scanner' not closed in 'accessFileSystemViaScanner'.
The Scanner instance scanner is not closed after use, which may cause resource leaks. Implement try-with-resources to ensure automatic closure.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
public static void accessFileSystemViaScanner() {
try {
- Scanner scanner = new Scanner(new File("pom123.xml"));
- scanner.nextLine();
+ try (Scanner scanner = new Scanner(new File("pom123.xml"))) {
+ scanner.nextLine();
+ }
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| try { | |
| Scanner scanner = new Scanner(new File("pom123.xml")); | |
| scanner.nextLine(); | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| try { | |
| try (Scanner scanner = new Scanner(new File("pom123.xml"))) { | |
| scanner.nextLine(); | |
| } | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } |
| public static void accessFileSystemViaFileChannelRead() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileChannel fileChannel = FileChannel.open(Path.of("pom123.xml")); | ||
| fileChannel.read(ByteBuffer.allocate(10)); | ||
| } catch (IOException e) { | ||
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Potential resource leak: 'FileChannel' not closed in 'accessFileSystemViaFileChannelRead'.
The FileChannel instance fileChannel is not closed after use, potentially leading to resource leaks. Use try-with-resources to ensure it is closed.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
public static void accessFileSystemViaFileChannelRead() {
try {
- FileChannel fileChannel = FileChannel.open(Path.of("pom123.xml"));
- fileChannel.read(ByteBuffer.allocate(10));
+ try (FileChannel fileChannel = FileChannel.open(Path.of("pom123.xml"))) {
+ fileChannel.read(ByteBuffer.allocate(10));
+ }
} catch (IOException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public static void accessFileSystemViaFileChannelRead() { | |
| try { | |
| FileChannel fileChannel = FileChannel.open(Path.of("pom123.xml")); | |
| fileChannel.read(ByteBuffer.allocate(10)); | |
| } catch (IOException e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public static void accessFileSystemViaFileChannelRead() { | |
| try { | |
| try (FileChannel fileChannel = FileChannel.open(Path.of("pom123.xml"))) { | |
| fileChannel.read(ByteBuffer.allocate(10)); | |
| } | |
| } catch (IOException e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } |
| try { | ||
| ObjectOutputStream stream = new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream("pom123.xml")); | ||
| stream.writeObject(new Object()); | ||
| } catch (Exception e) { | ||
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Potential resource leak: 'ObjectOutputStream' not closed in 'accessFileSystemViaObjectOutputStream'.
The ObjectOutputStream instance stream is not closed after use, possibly causing resource leaks. Use try-with-resources to ensure closure.
Apply this diff:
public static void accessFileSystemViaObjectOutputStream() {
try {
- ObjectOutputStream stream = new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream("pom123.xml"));
- stream.writeObject(new Object());
+ try (ObjectOutputStream stream = new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream("pom123.xml"))) {
+ stream.writeObject(new Object());
+ }
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| try { | |
| ObjectOutputStream stream = new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream("pom123.xml")); | |
| stream.writeObject(new Object()); | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public static void accessFileSystemViaObjectOutputStream() { | |
| try { | |
| try (ObjectOutputStream stream = new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream("pom123.xml"))) { | |
| stream.writeObject(new Object()); | |
| } | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } |
| public static void accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream() { | ||
| try { | ||
| DataInputStream stream = new DataInputStream(new FileInputStream("pom123.xml")); | ||
| stream.read(); | ||
| } catch (Exception e) { | ||
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Potential resource leak: 'DataInputStream' not closed in 'accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream'.
The DataInputStream instance stream is not closed after use, leading to potential resource leaks. Utilize try-with-resources for proper resource management.
Apply this diff:
public static void accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream() {
try {
- DataInputStream stream = new DataInputStream(new FileInputStream("pom123.xml"));
- stream.read();
+ try (DataInputStream stream = new DataInputStream(new FileInputStream("pom123.xml"))) {
+ stream.read();
+ }
} catch (Exception e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public static void accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream() { | |
| try { | |
| DataInputStream stream = new DataInputStream(new FileInputStream("pom123.xml")); | |
| stream.read(); | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public static void accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream() { | |
| try { | |
| try (DataInputStream stream = new DataInputStream(new FileInputStream("pom123.xml"))) { | |
| stream.read(); | |
| } | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException(e); | |
| } | |
| } |
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileExecuteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileExecute(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileExecuteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileExecute(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDesktopAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDesktop(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDesktopInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDesktop(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // --- Delete Operations --- | ||
| @Nested | ||
| class DeleteOperations { | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesDeleteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesDelete(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesDeleteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesDelete(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProviderAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProviderInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Refactor to reduce code duplication in ExecuteOperations and DeleteOperations.
Similar to the previous suggestion, the test methods in ExecuteOperations and DeleteOperations contain duplicated code. Refactoring to eliminate redundancy will enhance readability and maintainability.
| @Nested | ||
| class ExecuteOperations { | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileExecuteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileExecute(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileExecuteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileExecute(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDesktopAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDesktop(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationExecute.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDesktopInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDesktop(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use specific exception assertions in test methods of ExecuteOperations.
In the ExecuteOperations nested class, catching RuntimeException may not accurately reflect the expected exceptions. Consider catching SecurityException to improve test accuracy.
Modify the catch blocks:
try {
// Code that is expected to throw an exception
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
+ assertTrue(e instanceof SecurityException, "Expected a SecurityException to be thrown.");
// Expected exception
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesReadAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesRead(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesReadInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesRead(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDataInputStreamAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaDataInputStreamInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaDataInputStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaObjectInputStreamAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaObjectInputStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaObjectInputStreamInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaObjectInputStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaInputStreamReaderAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaInputStreamReader(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationRead.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaInputStreamReaderInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaInputStreamReader(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use specific exception assertions in test methods of ReadOperations.
In the ReadOperations nested class, the test methods catch RuntimeException, which may be too broad and can mask other exceptions. To ensure that the tests are accurately validating the expected behavior, consider catching SecurityException specifically and asserting its occurrence.
Apply changes similar to the following in each test method:
try {
// Code that is expected to throw an exception
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
+ assertTrue(e instanceof SecurityException, "Expected a SecurityException to be thrown.");
// Expected exception
}This change ensures the test confirms that a SecurityException is thrown, improving test precision.
Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaPrintStreamAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaPrintStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaPrintStreamInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaPrintStream(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileChannelWriteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileChannelWrite(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileChannelWriteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileChannelWrite(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileHandlerAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileHandler(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileHandlerInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileHandler(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesWriteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesWrite(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationWrite.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesWriteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesWrite(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use specific exception assertions in test methods of WriteOperations.
The test methods in the WriteOperations nested class also catch RuntimeException. For more precise testing, catch SecurityException specifically and assert that it is thrown.
Update the catch blocks in the test methods:
try {
// Code that is expected to throw an exception
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
+ assertTrue(e instanceof SecurityException, "Expected a SecurityException to be thrown.");
// Expected exception
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
| @Nested | ||
| class DeleteOperations { | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesDeleteAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesDelete(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFilesDeleteInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFilesDelete(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedAspectJDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProviderAspectJ() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @TestTest | ||
| @PublicTest | ||
| @Policy(value = "src/test/resources/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/securitypolicies/OnePathAllowedInstrumentationDelete.yaml", withinPath = "test-classes/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/student") | ||
| void test_accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProviderInstrumentation() { | ||
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use specific exception assertions in test methods of DeleteOperations.
The test methods within DeleteOperations catch RuntimeException. To ensure tests are validating the expected security behavior, catch and assert SecurityException instead.
Update the catch blocks accordingly:
try {
// Code that is expected to throw an exception
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
+ assertTrue(e instanceof SecurityException, "Expected a SecurityException to be thrown.");
// Expected exception
}Committable suggestion was skipped due to low confidence.
…on' into feature/archrule-command-execution
…on' into feature/archrule-command-execution
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files selected for processing (2)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/FileSystemAccessTest.java (1 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/fileSystem/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (3)
src/test/java/de/tum/cit/ase/ares/integration/testuser/subject/fileSystem/FileSystemAccessPenguin.java (3)
23-25: Method 'accessPath' implementation looks good.The method correctly reads the content of the given
PathusingFiles.readString(p).
27-29: The method 'askForFilePermission' lacks implementation.The
askForFilePermissionmethod currently contains no functional code except a comment indicating that permission checking was removed. If this method is no longer needed, consider removing it to keep the codebase clean. Otherwise, implement the necessary permission checks or provide documentation on its intended use.
403-406: Method 'accessFileSystemViaJFileChooser' implementation is correct.The method correctly opens a file chooser dialog using
JFileChooser.
| FileSystemProvider provider = FileSystemProvider.installedProviders().getFirst(); | ||
| provider.delete(Path.of("file.txt")); | ||
| provider.readAttributes(Path.of("pom123.xml"), "*"); | ||
| } catch (Exception e) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Incorrect method usage: 'getFirst()' is not a valid List method.
The getFirst() method does not exist in List<FileSystemProvider>. You should use get(0) to retrieve the first element. Additionally, ensure to check if the list is not empty to prevent IndexOutOfBoundsException.
Apply this diff to fix the issue:
- FileSystemProvider provider = FileSystemProvider.installedProviders().getFirst();
+ List<FileSystemProvider> providers = FileSystemProvider.installedProviders();
+ if (providers.isEmpty()) {
+ throw new RuntimeException("No FileSystemProviders installed");
+ }
+ FileSystemProvider provider = providers.get(0);
provider.delete(Path.of("file.txt"));
provider.readAttributes(Path.of("pom123.xml"), "*");Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| FileSystemProvider provider = FileSystemProvider.installedProviders().getFirst(); | |
| provider.delete(Path.of("file.txt")); | |
| provider.readAttributes(Path.of("pom123.xml"), "*"); | |
| } catch (Exception e) { | |
| List<FileSystemProvider> providers = FileSystemProvider.installedProviders(); | |
| if (providers.isEmpty()) { | |
| throw new RuntimeException("No FileSystemProviders installed"); | |
| } | |
| FileSystemProvider provider = providers.get(0); | |
| provider.delete(Path.of("file.txt")); | |
| provider.readAttributes(Path.of("pom123.xml"), "*"); | |
| } catch (Exception e) { |
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile(); | ||
| fail(); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Refactor test methods to use assertThrows for exception assertions
Currently, the test methods use try-catch blocks to assert that exceptions are thrown. Rewriting these tests using JUnit 5's assertThrows method improves readability and conciseness.
Apply the following refactor to each test method:
- try {
- FileSystemAccessPenguin.methodUnderTest();
- fail(errorMessage);
- } catch (RuntimeException e) {
- // Expected exception
- }
+ assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, () -> {
+ FileSystemAccessPenguin.methodUnderTest();
+ }, errorMessage);For example, refactor test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadAspectJ:
void test_accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFileReadAspectJ() {
- try {
- FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile();
- fail();
- } catch (RuntimeException e) {
- // Expected exception
- }
+ assertThrows(RuntimeException.class, () -> {
+ FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile();
+ });
}Also applies to: 145-152, 159-166, 171-178, 185-192, 197-204, 211-218, 223-230, 237-244, 249-256, 263-270, 275-282, 289-296, 301-308, 315-322, 327-334, 341-348, 353-360, 367-374, 379-386, 393-400, 405-412, 426-433, 438-445, 452-459, 464-471, 478-485, 490-497, 504-511, 516-523, 530-537, 542-549, 556-563, 568-575, 582-589, 594-601, 608-615, 620-627, 634-641, 646-653, 660-667, 672-679, 686-693, 698-705, 712-719, 724-731, 738-745, 750-757, 771-778, 783-790, 831-838, 843-850, 857-864, 869-876, 883-890, 895-902
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaRandomAccessFile(); | ||
| fail(); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ensure consistent use of fail(errorMessage) in test methods
Some test methods use fail() without an error message, while others use fail(errorMessage). For consistency and clearer failure messages, consider providing the errorMessage in all fail calls.
Apply this change to methods where fail() is called without an error message:
- fail();
+ fail(errorMessage);Also applies to: 146-148, 161-163, 172-174, 186-188, 197-199, 212-214, 223-225, 238-240, 250-252, 264-266, 276-278, 291-293, 302-304, 317-319, 328-330, 343-345, 354-356, 369-371, 380-382, 395-397, 406-408, 427-429, 439-441, 453-455, 465-467, 479-481, 491-493, 505-507, 517-519, 531-533, 543-545, 557-559, 569-571, 583-585, 595-597, 609-611, 621-623, 635-637, 647-649, 661-663, 673-675, 687-689, 699-701, 713-715, 725-727, 739-741, 751-753, 772-774, 784-786, 832-834, 844-846, 858-860, 870-872, 884-886, 896-898
| try { | ||
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | ||
| fail(errorMessage); | ||
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | ||
| // Expected exception | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix incorrect method call in test_accessFileSystemViaJFileChooserAspectJ
In the test_accessFileSystemViaJFileChooserAspectJ() method, the test is intended to assess accessFileSystemViaJFileChooser(), but it currently calls accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(). This likely prevents the test from evaluating the correct functionality.
Apply the following fix:
void test_accessFileSystemViaJFileChooserAspectJ() {
try {
- FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider();
+ FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaJFileChooser();
fail(errorMessage);
} catch (RuntimeException e) {
// Expected exception
}
}This ensures the test evaluates the intended method.
Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| try { | |
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaFileSystemProvider(); | |
| fail(errorMessage); | |
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | |
| // Expected exception | |
| } | |
| } | |
| try { | |
| FileSystemAccessPenguin.accessFileSystemViaJFileChooser(); | |
| fail(errorMessage); | |
| } catch (RuntimeException e) { | |
| // Expected exception | |
| } | |
| } |
Checklist
General
Ares
Motivation and Context
Allowing command execution in a programming exercise can lead to serious security violations. Users could execute harmful commands, such as deleting files, reading sensitive data, or escalating privileges to take over the system. This opens the door to arbitrary code execution and remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities, where malicious code could compromise the system.
Additionally, users may perform denial of service (DoS) attacks by running resource-intensive commands or crash services, leading to system downtime. Unrestricted command execution also enables attackers to target external systems, launching attacks or downloading malicious files. In severe cases, users could introduce persistence mechanisms, like backdoors or scheduled tasks, for ongoing control of the system.
To mitigate these risks, it's crucial to sandbox the environment, enforce strict permission limits, sanitize input, disable dangerous commands, and monitor user activities. Failing to do so can compromise system integrity, expose sensitive data, and open the system to further attacks.
Description
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor
Review Progress
Code Review
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Chores
maven-shade-pluginversion and configuration for better artifact management.