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

details formatting is incorrect and malformated #579

Open
lukehinds opened this issue Jul 11, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

details formatting is incorrect and malformated #579

lukehinds opened this issue Jul 11, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@lukehinds
Copy link
Contributor

lukehinds commented Jul 11, 2024

Taking a look at the following https://osv.dev/vulnerability/MAL-2024-7462

Extra text has been added which is was not in the original report. Some of this seems to be markdown ## there is also a source added 'ghsa-malware' along with some generic text and -= Per source details. Do not edit below this line.=-

This makes it difficult for us to use the details section of the payload, without getting into some sort of regex to clean things up.

Our current pattern of reporting is to submit to OSV.dev and then render the details section on our own API:

image

Other packages we have added, do not have the source delimiter https://osv.dev/vulnerability/MAL-2024-1199

@oliverchang
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for dropping the ball on this! @calebbrown can you help with answering this?

@calebbrown
Copy link
Contributor

Hi Luke,

This behavior is intentional. The Malicious Packages repository aggregates reports from multiple sources so it is has to account for the possibility that multiple sources include a report.

Any content below the -= Per source details. Do not edit below this line.=- marker is managed by the automation in the repository when there is a "source" data present (this is separate to the credits part of OSV).

For reports contributed by users in PRs, etc without "source" data the content above the marker is preserved.

A regexp is a reasonable approach for cleaning it up, but I'm happy to consider alternative approaches to the aggregation problem too.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants