-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Rescan #169
Rescan #169
Changes from all commits
e91bc1b
5a9ce92
b8842db
e08614d
a3b336b
1fd4d89
5eed66a
433f83e
587b030
c09f338
3686da4
4b2f2bb
fd46f4e
45994bb
052f5c9
c02ad47
6628196
02aedd7
c8062fd
396cd08
d1649b8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -8,8 +8,10 @@ | |
|
||
transfer.progress={0}% transferred | ||
|
||
message.created.scan=Successfully submitted {0} scan for analysis. Scan ID: {1} | ||
message.scan.overview={0} scan overview: {1} | ||
message.created.scan=Successfully submitted {0} scan for analysis. Scan ID: | ||
message.scan.overview={0} scan overview: | ||
message.rescan= Successfully submitted rescan for analysis. Execution ID: | ||
message.rescan.overview= Rescan overview: | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Are message.rescan and message.rescan.overview used anywhere? I don't see them referenced in this PR. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes, We are using them in the rescan() method. |
||
message.running.scan=Creating and executing {0} scan... | ||
message.uploading.file=Uploading {0} to the analysis service... | ||
message.done=Done. | ||
|
@@ -54,6 +56,7 @@ error.login.type.deprectated=The specified login type is deprecated. Please use | |
error.getting.info=An error occurred getting information for {0} with id {1}. | ||
error.getting.scanlog=An error occurred retrieving the scan log. | ||
error.url.validation = An error occurred while validating the Starting URL: {0}. | ||
message.update.job = Updated the scan job parameters. | ||
|
||
#Presence | ||
error.getting.presence.details=An error occurred retrieving details for Presence with id {0}. | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -47,10 +47,16 @@ public class CloudResultsProvider implements IResultsProvider, Serializable, Cor | |
protected int m_mediumFindings; | ||
protected int m_lowFindings; | ||
protected int m_infoFindings; | ||
protected String m_executionId; | ||
|
||
public CloudResultsProvider(String scanId, String type, IScanServiceProvider provider, IProgress progress) { | ||
this(scanId, null, type, provider, progress); | ||
} | ||
|
||
public CloudResultsProvider(String scanId, String executionId, String type, IScanServiceProvider provider, IProgress progress) { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. To limit duplication of code, it would be good to have the original constructor that does not take an executionId call this one directly. E.g.: There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Okay, sure. |
||
m_type = type; | ||
m_scanId = scanId; | ||
m_executionId = executionId; | ||
m_hasResults = false; | ||
m_scanProvider = provider; | ||
m_progress = progress; | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What's the reason for removing the {1} at the end of each of these strings? It looks like the calls that use them still provide information for the 2nd parameter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We are assigning the 2nd value in a common method ("executeScan") used for createAndExecuteScan() & rescan(). So, for new scan the 2nd value will be scanId while for the rescanning it would be executionId.