Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fixing CVE critical issues by resolving kerby/jline and wildfly libraries #12566

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 6, 2024

Conversation

xiangfu0
Copy link
Contributor

@xiangfu0 xiangfu0 commented Mar 6, 2024

  1. Remove io.netty:netty library
  2. Consolidate org.apache.kerby:kerb-core and org.apache.kerby:kerb-simplekdc version to 2.0.3
  3. Consolidate org.jline:jline version to 3.22.0
  4. Consolidate org.wildfly.common:wildfly-common version to 1.5.4.Final

@@ -857,6 +860,10 @@
<groupId>commons-logging</groupId>
<artifactId>commons-logging</artifactId>
</exclusion>
<exclusion>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to exclude netty? We have netty-bom in the dependency

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are using io.netty:netty-all:jar:4.1.107.Final, this is older dependency.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't follow. Since we have netty explicitly configured, it should pull the new netty, and there should be no need to exclude it

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Figured that netty is the old netty-all which is already deprecated, so it should be safe to exclude

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Mar 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.58%. Comparing base (59551e4) to head (5ddecfd).
Report is 64 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #12566      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     61.75%   61.58%   -0.17%     
  Complexity      207      207              
============================================
  Files          2436     2451      +15     
  Lines        133233   133730     +497     
  Branches      20636    20704      +68     
============================================
+ Hits          82274    82355      +81     
- Misses        44911    45267     +356     
- Partials       6048     6108      +60     
Flag Coverage Δ
custom-integration1 <0.01% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
integration <0.01% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
integration1 ?
integration2 0.00% <ø> (ø)
java-11 27.65% <ø> (-34.06%) ⬇️
java-21 34.90% <ø> (-26.72%) ⬇️
skip-bytebuffers-false 61.56% <ø> (-0.19%) ⬇️
skip-bytebuffers-true 46.72% <ø> (+18.99%) ⬆️
temurin 61.58% <ø> (-0.17%) ⬇️
unittests 61.57% <ø> (-0.17%) ⬇️
unittests1 46.75% <ø> (-0.14%) ⬇️
unittests2 27.64% <ø> (-0.09%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@xiangfu0 xiangfu0 added dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file cve labels Mar 6, 2024
@xiangfu0 xiangfu0 merged commit 2e84561 into apache:master Mar 6, 2024
20 of 21 checks passed
@xiangfu0 xiangfu0 deleted the fixing-cve-more branch March 6, 2024 07:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cve dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants