Update codeql-analysis.yml with defaults #174
Conversation
adds default permissions to Codeql workflow.
WalkthroughThe pull request modifies the GitHub Actions workflow for CodeQL analysis. It introduces a new Changes
Possibly related PRs
Poem
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
Documentation and Community
|
github-actions
bot
added
Testing
![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
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (2)
23-23: Consider removing the empty permissions block.
The empty permissions block at the workflow level is redundant since permissions are explicitly defined at the job level. This follows the principle of least privilege but might cause confusion.
-permissions: {}Language matrix configuration is appropriate
The repository contains only Python files and no JavaScript files. The current CodeQL analysis configuration includes Python, which is correct, but JavaScript can be safely removed from the matrix since there are no JavaScript files in the codebase. Additionally, there are no other CodeQL-supported languages (C/C++, C#, Go, Java, or Ruby) present in the repository.
- Remove 'javascript' from the language matrix in
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint 36-39: Verify complete language coverage for the repository.
Let's ensure that Python and JavaScript are the only languages that need CodeQL analysis.
Let me verify the presence of Python and JavaScript files to ensure we have complete coverage.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for presence of other CodeQL-supported languages in the repository
# Search for file extensions of other supported languages
echo "Searching for other CodeQL-supported languages..."
echo "C/C++ files:"
fd -e c -e cpp -e h -e hpp
echo "C# files:"
fd -e cs
echo "Go files:"
fd -e go
echo "Java files:"
fd -e java
echo "Ruby files:"
fd -e rb
Length of output: 342
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for Python and JavaScript files
echo "Python files:"
fd -e py
echo -e "\nJavaScript files:"
fd -e js -e jsx -e ts -e tsx
Length of output: 621
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- .github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (1)
Pattern .github/**: * When the project is hosted on GitHub: All GitHub-specific configurations, templates, and tools should be found in the '.github' directory tree.
- 'actionlint' erroneously generates false positives when dealing with GitHub's
${{ ... }}syntax in conditionals. - 'actionlint' erroneously generates incorrect solutions when suggesting the removal of valid
${{ ... }}syntax.
📓 Learnings (1)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-12T00:41:41.731Z
Learning: For future scripts, reactive-firewall prefers to use only POSIX built-ins (like `printf` instead of `echo`) to align with CEP-8 conventions.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-21T04:40:19.258Z
Learning: For future reviews, remember that reactive-firewall prefers to keep un-mapped exit codes as they are until they are ready to be mapped.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-12T03:22:28.902Z
Learning: For future scripts, reactive-firewall prefers to keep the shebang line with an extra space (e.g., `#! /bin/bash`) as per project style.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#110
File: docs/CI.md:32-32
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T21:59:30.537Z
Learning: Reactive-firewall prefers to keep the word "own" in headings when emphasizing the reader's personal test.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#110
File: docs/CI.md:32-32
Timestamp: 2024-09-17T06:40:42.918Z
Learning: Reactive-firewall prefers to keep the word "own" in headings when emphasizing the reader's personal test.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T03:15:05.171Z
Learning: For future reviews, remember that when drafting or updating CEP documents, it's important to adhere to the project's standard format and include all relevant sections such as Motivation, Detailed Explanation, Implementation Guidelines, Impact, and References.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T21:59:30.537Z
Learning: For future reviews, remember that when drafting or updating CEP documents, it's important to adhere to the project's standard format and include all relevant sections such as Motivation, Detailed Explanation, Implementation Guidelines, Impact, and References.
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#110
File: docs/USAGE.md:66-66
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T21:59:30.537Z
Learning: Reactive-firewall prefers to use "Caveat" as a heading instead of "Caution".
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#110
File: docs/USAGE.md:66-66
Timestamp: 2024-09-17T03:38:28.677Z
Learning: Reactive-firewall prefers to use "Caveat" as a heading instead of "Caution".
Learnt from: reactive-firewall
PR: reactive-firewall/multicast#118
File: tests/check_pip:92-197
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T21:59:30.537Z
Learning: Reactive-firewall prefers defining functions before they are called in Bash scripts to avoid errors due to Bash's sequential interpretation.
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/codeql-analysis.yml (1)
Line range hint 29-32: LGTM! Permissions follow security best practices.
The job-level permissions are correctly configured with the minimum required access levels for CodeQL analysis:
actions: readfor workflow executioncontents: readfor repository accesssecurity-events: writefor uploading analysis results
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #174 +/- ##
=============================================
- Coverage 98.246% 97.243% -1.002%
=============================================
Files 7 7
Lines 399 399
Branches 24 24
=============================================
- Hits 392 388 -4
- Misses 3 6 +3
- Partials 4 5 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. see 2 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Summary by CodeRabbit