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

Add python-check-blanket-nosec hook for bandit #96

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

Conversation

mkniewallner
Copy link

Version 1.7.3 of Python SAST tool bandit added support for disabling individual tests in PyCQA/bandit#597.

It is now possible to disable specific codes like so:

# nosec: B101, B102
# nosec: B101 subprocess_popen_with_shell_equals_true

I thought that this could be a nice thing to have in this project.

@mkniewallner mkniewallner marked this pull request as ready for review March 1, 2022 21:11
- id: python-check-blanket-nosec
name: check blanket nosec
description: 'Enforce that bandit `nosec` annotations always occur with specific codes. Sample annotations: `# nosec: B101`, `# nosec: B101,B102`'
entry: '# *nosec(?!: *\w)'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is there a reason this is different from the noqa pattern?

Copy link
Author

@mkniewallner mkniewallner Mar 1, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is to have something similar to bandit regex (https://github.com/PyCQA/bandit/blob/5747e306262d71aca46542f71c6fda116de98b6c/bandit/core/manager.py#L25), though for consistency it may indeed be nice to have something closer to noqa pattern (maybe without (?i), as nosec is case sensitive).

@ericbuehl
Copy link

I just posted a nearly identical PR before seeing this one. 🤦 Here is the regex I came up with:

entry: '(?i)#\s*nosec:?\s*(?![^#])'

@ericbuehl ericbuehl mentioned this pull request Sep 20, 2023
3 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants