fix(detect_secrets): refactor logic for detect-secrets

[pedrooot]

Context

Fix #6467
Thanks @kagahd for the heads up! 🚀

Description

This PR change the logic from the checks: ecs_task_definitions_no_environment_secrets, awslambda_function_no_secrets_in_variables
The main problem here is that we are re-writing the ecs env vars into a format that Detect-Secrets could find them and we were using the line from the output to create the status_extended. That's why the line was incorrect (it was taking the lines from the re-written variables).

The new approach changes the status extended from:
...Secret keyword on line 2.
to
...Secret keyword on env var DB_PASSWORD.

This way, the user will have the env name on the output.

Checklist

• Are there new checks included in this PR? Yes / No
  • If so, do we need to update permissions for the provider? Please review this carefully.
• Review if the code is being covered by tests.
• Review if code is being documented following this specification https://github.com/google/styleguide/blob/gh-pages/pyguide.md#38-comments-and-docstrings
• Review if backport is needed.
• Review if is needed to change the Readme.md

License

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

[kagahd]

I like the fix because it will be easier spot the potential secret. However, I think other checks that use DetectSecrets may have the same problem if they refer to the line number, aren't they?

[pedrooot]

@kagahd I've been reviewing the logic from the remaining checks using detect-secrets on the same way and the numbers from the lines are correct.
Also, I've modified the check awslambda_function_no_secrets_in_variables in order to apply the same logic when getting the env var name in the status_extended.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.47%. Comparing base (10a4c28) to head (53b2d43).
Report is 28 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6537      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   93.67%   89.47%   -4.21%     
==========================================
  Files          66     1182    +1116     
  Lines        6338    33993   +27655     
==========================================
+ Hits         5937    30414   +24477     
- Misses        401     3579    +3178     

Flag	Coverage Δ
api	?
prowler	89.47% <100.00%> (?)

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

Components	Coverage Δ
prowler	89.47% <100.00%> (∅)
api	∅ <ø> (∅)

[jfagoagas]

That's fantastic, what a great improvement 👏

[prowler-bot]

💚 All backports created successfully

Status	Branch	Result
✅	v4.6
✅	v5.1

Questions ?

Please refer to the Backport tool documentation and see the Github Action logs for details