Skip to content

[Snyk] Security upgrade jszip from 3.2.2 to 3.8.0 #165

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

renczesstefan
Copy link
Member

This PR was automatically created by Snyk using the credentials of a real user.


Snyk has created this PR to fix one or more vulnerable packages in the `npm` dependencies of this project.

Changes included in this PR

  • Changes to the following files to upgrade the vulnerable dependencies to a fixed version:
    • package.json

Vulnerabilities that will be fixed

With an upgrade:
Severity Priority Score (*) Issue Breaking Change Exploit Maturity
medium severity 601/1000
Why? Recently disclosed, Has a fix available, CVSS 6.3
Arbitrary File Write via Archive Extraction (Zip Slip)
SNYK-JS-JSZIP-3188562
No No Known Exploit

(*) Note that the real score may have changed since the PR was raised.

Commit messages
Package name: jszip The new version differs by 73 commits.
  • 3b98cfc 3.8.0
  • 2edab36 Sanitize filenames with `loadAsync` to prevent zip slip attacks
  • 1f631b0 Update contributing
  • 459ff79 Add tests for utils that remove leading slash
  • d4702a7 Merge pull request #541 from PatricSteffen/patch-1
  • 2ebb7e8 Merge pull request #737 from satoshicano/update-types-JSZipLoadOptions
  • 85c4989 Merge pull request #796 from Stuk/ghci
  • 40cc7f4 Add dependency caching
  • 5ee321e Install deps needed for Playwright on Github Actions
  • eeb841e Remove code and dependencies used for Saucelabs
  • e281bc3 Test using Playwright instead of Saucelabs
  • f7275e6 Use local qunit files in tests
  • 0509c73 Add playwright and http-server
  • 2bb0f74 Add names to steps
  • a076d64 Add Github Actions PR workflow
  • 3f2f0da 3.7.1
  • 9f9c33b Updates for 3.7.1
  • 5639745 Merge branch 'fix-build'
  • e08003e Fix lint
  • 79f7691 Revert "Disable proto assert that fails in browsers"
  • 89298b9 Update gitignore for Mac, and sort
  • 81cb5eb Temporarily update docs for building dist correctly
  • e5b3f0d 3.7.0
  • e88ba4b Update for version 3.7.0

See the full diff

Check the changes in this PR to ensure they won't cause issues with your project.


Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open fix PRs.

For more information:
🧐 View latest project report

🛠 Adjust project settings

📚 Read more about Snyk's upgrade and patch logic


Learn how to fix vulnerabilities with free interactive lessons:

🦉 Learn about vulnerability in an interactive lesson of Snyk Learn.

The following vulnerabilities are fixed with an upgrade:
- https://snyk.io/vuln/SNYK-JS-JSZIP-3188562
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 2 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +1 -1
Percentile : 0.8%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.json : +1 -1

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 5, 2023

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants