feat(006): implement security recommendations from SECURITY.md #9
Conversation
Implements Feature 006 with 7 user stories (US1-US7) and 13 functional requirements: Security Features: - Path traversal prevention with symlink handling (FR-001, FR-002) - CSV formula injection protection (single-quote escaping) (FR-004, FR-005) - File permission checks on sensitive files (FR-007, FR-008) - Content-Type header validation on API responses (FR-006) - Token masking in logs with [MASKED] pattern (FR-010) - Timeout threshold warnings (FR-011) - Verbose mode with API audit logging (FR-009) Code Changes: - New: src/github_analyzer/core/security.py (8 utility functions) - New: tests/unit/core/test_security.py (77 tests, 100% coverage) - Updated: All exporters with path validation and CSV escaping - Updated: API client with Content-Type and verbose logging - Updated: CLI with --verbose flag and permission checks - Updated: requirements.txt with exact pin (requests==2.31.0) - Updated: requirements-dev.txt with bounded ranges Test Results: 887 passed, 7 skipped
Summary of ChangesHello @amargiovanni, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly enhances the security posture of the GitHub Analyzer application by implementing a suite of recommendations derived from a recent security audit. The changes focus on preventing common vulnerabilities such as path traversal and CSV injection, improving supply chain security through dependency management, and providing better visibility into application behavior via audit logging and security warnings. These updates aim to make the tool more resilient and trustworthy for users handling sensitive data. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
|
/gemini review |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This is an excellent pull request that systematically implements the security recommendations from the SECURITY.md audit. The introduction of a dedicated core/security.py module is a great architectural choice, centralizing security logic. The changes are comprehensive, covering path traversal, CSV formula injection, dependency pinning, and more. The accompanying tests are thorough and cover numerous edge cases, ensuring the new security features are robust. I have one suggestion to simplify the path validation logic to make it more idiomatic for Python 3.9+.
src/github_analyzer/core/security.py
Outdated
| # Resolve both paths to handle symlinks (FR-013) | ||
| resolved_base = base_dir.resolve() | ||
|
|
||
| # Convert path to Path object | ||
| path_obj = Path(path) | ||
|
|
||
| # For relative paths, resolve against the base directory | ||
| if not path_obj.is_absolute(): | ||
| resolved_path = (resolved_base / path_obj).resolve() | ||
| else: | ||
| resolved_path = path_obj.resolve() | ||
|
|
||
| # Check if path is within safe boundary | ||
| try: | ||
| resolved_path.relative_to(resolved_base) | ||
| except ValueError as err: | ||
| raise ValidationError(f"Output path must be within {resolved_base}") from err |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This implementation for path resolution and validation is correct, but it can be simplified and made more idiomatic for Python 3.9+, which this project targets.
- The
if/elseblock for handling absolute and relative paths is redundant. Thepathlib/operator correctly handles joining a base path with either a relative or an absolute path. - Since the project uses Python 3.9+, you can use the
Path.is_relative_to()method, which is more direct and readable than using atry...except ValueErrorblock withPath.relative_to().
This suggestion combines these two improvements for a more concise and maintainable function.
| # Resolve both paths to handle symlinks (FR-013) | |
| resolved_base = base_dir.resolve() | |
| # Convert path to Path object | |
| path_obj = Path(path) | |
| # For relative paths, resolve against the base directory | |
| if not path_obj.is_absolute(): | |
| resolved_path = (resolved_base / path_obj).resolve() | |
| else: | |
| resolved_path = path_obj.resolve() | |
| # Check if path is within safe boundary | |
| try: | |
| resolved_path.relative_to(resolved_base) | |
| except ValueError as err: | |
| raise ValidationError(f"Output path must be within {resolved_base}") from err | |
| # Resolve the base directory to an absolute path to handle symlinks. | |
| resolved_base = base_dir.resolve() | |
| # Resolve the input path. If it's relative, it's resolved relative to the | |
| # base directory. If it's absolute, it's used as is. Then resolve symlinks. | |
| resolved_path = (resolved_base / path).resolve() | |
| # Check if the resolved path is within the safe boundary. | |
| # Using `is_relative_to` is more idiomatic for Python 3.9+. | |
| if not resolved_path.is_relative_to(resolved_base): | |
| raise ValidationError(f"Output path must be within {resolved_base}") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request is a significant step forward in hardening the application's security posture, implementing a wide range of recommendations from the SECURITY.md audit. The introduction of a dedicated core/security.py module is a great architectural choice, centralizing security logic for path validation, CSV formula escaping, and more. The changes are comprehensive, well-tested, and demonstrate a strong commitment to security best practices. My feedback focuses on minor refactoring opportunities to improve code conciseness and maintainability in a few areas, but overall, this is excellent work.
src/github_analyzer/core/security.py
Outdated
| # For relative paths, resolve against the base directory | ||
| if not path_obj.is_absolute(): | ||
| resolved_path = (resolved_base / path_obj).resolve() | ||
| else: | ||
| resolved_path = path_obj.resolve() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The logic to resolve the path can be simplified. pathlib's / operator correctly handles joining an absolute path, which discards the base path. This means the if/else block can be replaced with a single line, making the code more concise and easier to read.
# The `pathlib.Path.joinpath()` method (the `/` operator) correctly handles
# joining an absolute path, which will discard the base. We can then
# resolve symlinks and '..' components in the combined path.
resolved_path = (resolved_base / path_obj).resolve()| writer.writerow({ | ||
| "key": issue.key, | ||
| "summary": issue.summary, | ||
| "description": issue.description, | ||
| "status": issue.status, | ||
| "issue_type": issue.issue_type, | ||
| "priority": issue.priority or "", | ||
| "assignee": issue.assignee or "", | ||
| "reporter": issue.reporter, | ||
| "key": escape_csv_formula(issue.key), | ||
| "summary": escape_csv_formula(issue.summary), | ||
| "description": escape_csv_formula(issue.description), | ||
| "status": escape_csv_formula(issue.status), | ||
| "issue_type": escape_csv_formula(issue.issue_type), | ||
| "priority": escape_csv_formula(issue.priority or ""), | ||
| "assignee": escape_csv_formula(issue.assignee or ""), | ||
| "reporter": escape_csv_formula(issue.reporter), | ||
| "created": issue.created.isoformat() if issue.created else "", | ||
| "updated": issue.updated.isoformat() if issue.updated else "", | ||
| "resolution_date": issue.resolution_date.isoformat() if issue.resolution_date else "", | ||
| "project_key": issue.project_key, | ||
| "project_key": escape_csv_formula(issue.project_key), | ||
| }) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The formula escaping logic is repeated for each field. This can be simplified by first creating the dictionary for the row with original values, and then passing the entire dictionary to escape_csv_row. This would make the code cleaner, reduce repetition, and be easier to maintain. This same pattern can be applied to export_comments and export_issues_with_metrics as well.
| writer.writerow({ | |
| "key": issue.key, | |
| "summary": issue.summary, | |
| "description": issue.description, | |
| "status": issue.status, | |
| "issue_type": issue.issue_type, | |
| "priority": issue.priority or "", | |
| "assignee": issue.assignee or "", | |
| "reporter": issue.reporter, | |
| "key": escape_csv_formula(issue.key), | |
| "summary": escape_csv_formula(issue.summary), | |
| "description": escape_csv_formula(issue.description), | |
| "status": escape_csv_formula(issue.status), | |
| "issue_type": escape_csv_formula(issue.issue_type), | |
| "priority": escape_csv_formula(issue.priority or ""), | |
| "assignee": escape_csv_formula(issue.assignee or ""), | |
| "reporter": escape_csv_formula(issue.reporter), | |
| "created": issue.created.isoformat() if issue.created else "", | |
| "updated": issue.updated.isoformat() if issue.updated else "", | |
| "resolution_date": issue.resolution_date.isoformat() if issue.resolution_date else "", | |
| "project_key": issue.project_key, | |
| "project_key": escape_csv_formula(issue.project_key), | |
| }) | |
| writer.writerow(escape_csv_row({ | |
| "key": issue.key, | |
| "summary": issue.summary, | |
| "description": issue.description, | |
| "status": issue.status, | |
| "issue_type": issue.issue_type, | |
| "priority": issue.priority or "", | |
| "assignee": issue.assignee or "", | |
| "reporter": issue.reporter, | |
| "created": issue.created.isoformat() if issue.created else "", | |
| "updated": issue.updated.isoformat() if issue.updated else "", | |
| "resolution_date": issue.resolution_date.isoformat() if issue.resolution_date else "", | |
| "project_key": issue.project_key, | |
| })) |
- Remove redundant if/else for absolute/relative path handling - Use is_relative_to() instead of try/except ValueError pattern - Reduces code from 21 to 11 lines while maintaining same behavior
… SECURITY.md README.md: - Add detailed Security section with 6 subsections - Document credential management, input validation, network security - Document output security (CSV injection, path validation, permissions) - Document error handling and minimal dependencies approach - Link to SECURITY.md for full analysis SECURITY.md: - Complete security analysis report with OWASP Top 10 coverage - Document all security controls with code references - Include attack surface analysis and mitigation strategies - Add appendices for files analyzed, env vars, and headers
Implements Feature 006 with 7 user stories (US1-US7) and 13 functional requirements:
Security Features:
Code Changes:
Test Results: 887 passed, 7 skipped