-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
Update regex to prevent ReDOS and add scanner #777
Closed
Closed
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
25fa570
Add redos checker and run on CI
tjenkinson 55f30d1
Update regex's to prevene ReDOS
tjenkinson 3c62c05
Remove js fixture package-lock.json
tjenkinson 3888516
Add another markdown test when no language
tjenkinson fa5a4bc
Fix version regex
tjenkinson File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | ||
| { | ||
| "plugins": ["redos-detector"], | ||
| "parser": "@typescript-eslint/parser", | ||
| "parserOptions": { "ecmaVersion": "latest" }, | ||
| "rules": { | ||
| "redos-detector/no-unsafe-regex": ["error"], | ||
| }, | ||
| } | ||
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ | ||
| node_modules/ | ||
| .eslintcache | ||
| build/ | ||
| coverage/ | ||
| package/ | ||
|
|
||
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 are the advantages of this plugin compared, for example, with
eslint-plugin-redos?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.
They take different approaches. With mine the goal was to never report a pattern as safe when it's not, so it may have false positives
Not sure if they have the same goal. With a fuzzing approach I think there is the potential to miss things but looks like sometimes it also uses an automation which maybe can't miss stuff
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.
for what it's worth, looks like that one doesn't handle back references as well
/(a)\1*$/is a false positive with that one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tjenkinson I'm the author of
eslint-plugin-redos, and, I found this comment luckily ;)/(a)\1*$/seems a vulnerable regex to me and my detector also reports it as vulnerable, so what is it problem?(If you feel that discussion here is not beneficial, please email to me or open a new issue to makenowjust-labs/recheck instead.)
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.
Hey @makenowjust !
/(a)\1*$/is essentially/aa*$/which is not vulnerable?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.
Ah I see maybe it is without the start anchor 🤔
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.
Yes.
/(a)\1*$/is essentially/^.*aa*$/s, so it is vulnerable.