-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
Fix potentially privileged pull request medium query #19085
Conversation
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.
Pull Request Overview
This PR fixes the handling of pull request code injection alerts by updating the associated configuration files and change notes.
- Updated change notes to document the fix for the pull_request medium query.
- Modified externally_triggereable_events.yml to include the "pull_request" event.
- Updated context_event_map.yml with mappings for the "pull_request" event.
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.
File | Description |
---|---|
actions/ql/lib/change-notes/released/2025-03-20-pullrequest.md | Adds a release note for the pull_request medium query fix |
actions/ql/lib/ext/config/externally_triggereable_events.yml | Adds the "pull_request" event to the externally triggereable events list |
actions/ql/lib/ext/config/context_event_map.yml | Adds mappings for the "pull_request" event to the context event map |
Files not reviewed (2)
- actions/ql/test/query-tests/Security/CWE-094/CodeInjectionCritical.expected: Language not supported
- actions/ql/test/query-tests/Security/CWE-094/CodeInjectionMedium.expected: Language not supported
Tip: Copilot code review supports C#, Go, Java, JavaScript, Markdown, Python, Ruby and TypeScript, with more languages coming soon. Learn more
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.
Looks reasonable, one change note suggestion.
Is there a reason we didn't include these to begin with - were they considered trusted?
Co-authored-by: Aditya Sharad <[email protected]>
Workflows are considered running without permissions and secrets when |
Please merge. I don't have the permission. |
No description provided.