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

Verify yaml #4639

Merged
merged 16 commits into from
Dec 13, 2024
Merged

Verify yaml #4639

merged 16 commits into from
Dec 13, 2024

Conversation

bengl
Copy link
Collaborator

@bengl bengl commented Aug 29, 2024

Ensures that plugins are tested with the same ranges that they support.

@bengl bengl requested review from a team as code owners August 29, 2024 15:48
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Overall package size

Self size: 8.26 MB
Deduped: 94.55 MB
No deduping: 95.07 MB

Dependency sizes | name | version | self size | total size | |------|---------|-----------|------------| | @datadog/libdatadog | 0.2.2 | 29.27 MB | 29.27 MB | | @datadog/native-appsec | 8.3.0 | 19.37 MB | 19.38 MB | | @datadog/native-iast-taint-tracking | 3.2.0 | 13.9 MB | 13.91 MB | | @datadog/pprof | 5.4.1 | 9.76 MB | 10.13 MB | | protobufjs | 7.2.5 | 2.77 MB | 5.16 MB | | @datadog/native-iast-rewriter | 2.6.0 | 2.58 MB | 2.72 MB | | @opentelemetry/core | 1.14.0 | 872.87 kB | 1.47 MB | | @datadog/native-metrics | 3.0.1 | 1.06 MB | 1.46 MB | | @opentelemetry/api | 1.8.0 | 1.21 MB | 1.21 MB | | import-in-the-middle | 1.11.2 | 112.74 kB | 826.22 kB | | source-map | 0.7.4 | 226 kB | 226 kB | | opentracing | 0.14.7 | 194.81 kB | 194.81 kB | | lru-cache | 7.18.3 | 133.92 kB | 133.92 kB | | pprof-format | 2.1.0 | 111.69 kB | 111.69 kB | | @datadog/sketches-js | 2.1.0 | 109.9 kB | 109.9 kB | | semver | 7.6.3 | 95.82 kB | 95.82 kB | | lodash.sortby | 4.7.0 | 75.76 kB | 75.76 kB | | ignore | 5.3.1 | 51.46 kB | 51.46 kB | | shell-quote | 1.8.1 | 44.96 kB | 44.96 kB | | istanbul-lib-coverage | 3.2.0 | 29.34 kB | 29.34 kB | | rfdc | 1.3.1 | 25.21 kB | 25.21 kB | | @isaacs/ttlcache | 1.4.1 | 25.2 kB | 25.2 kB | | tlhunter-sorted-set | 0.1.0 | 24.94 kB | 24.94 kB | | limiter | 1.1.5 | 23.17 kB | 23.17 kB | | dc-polyfill | 0.1.4 | 23.1 kB | 23.1 kB | | retry | 0.13.1 | 18.85 kB | 18.85 kB | | jest-docblock | 29.7.0 | 8.99 kB | 12.76 kB | | crypto-randomuuid | 1.0.0 | 11.18 kB | 11.18 kB | | path-to-regexp | 0.1.12 | 6.6 kB | 6.6 kB | | koalas | 1.0.2 | 6.47 kB | 6.47 kB | | module-details-from-path | 1.0.3 | 4.47 kB | 4.47 kB |

🤖 This report was automatically generated by heaviest-objects-in-the-universe

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2024-12-13 21:15:16

Comparing candidate commit b5c8eb2 in PR branch bengl/verify-yaml with baseline commit 83c6928 in branch master.

Found 1 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 262 metrics, 3 unstable metrics.

scenario:plugin-graphql-with-depth-and-collapse-on-18

  • 🟩 max_rss_usage [-86.749MB; -85.771MB] or [-9.163%; -9.059%]

@@ -16,6 +16,10 @@ concurrency:

jobs:
aerospike-node-16:
strategy:
matrix:
node-version: [16]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems like node-version is not actually used?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, it's for validation in the script. I'm gonna try to work out a better way of expressing this though.

@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch 2 times, most recently from a9149f6 to 6c1a50f Compare August 29, 2024 20:25
node-version: [16, 18, 20, 22]
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟠 Code Vulnerability

Workflow depends on a GitHub actions pinned by tag (...read more)

Pin third party actions by hash, or at least by tag for trusted sources

When using a third party action, one needs to provide its GitHub path (owner/project) and can eventually pin it to a git ref (a branch name, a git tag, or a commit hash).

No pinned git ref means the action will use the latest commit of the default branch each time it runs, eventually running newer versions of the code that were not audited by Datadog. Specifying a git tag is better, but since they are not immutable, using a full length hash is recommended to make sure the action content is actually frozen to some reviewed state.

Be careful however, as even pinning an action by hash can be circumvented by attackers still. For instance, if an action relies on a Docker image which is itself not pinned to a digest, it becomes possible to alter its behaviour through the Docker image without actually changing its hash. You can learn more about this kind of attacks in Unpinnable Actions: How Malicious Code Can Sneak into Your GitHub Actions Workflows. Pinning actions by hash is still a good first line of defense against supply chain attacks.

Additionally, pinning by hash or tag means the action won’t benefit from newer version updates if any, including eventual security patches. Make sure to regularly check if newer versions for an action you use are available. For actions coming from a very trustworthy source, it can make sense to use a laxer pinning policy to benefit from updates as soon as possible.

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Shouldn't actions always be a trusted org? If we can't trust GitHub then why is our code on GitHub?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we just disable this entirely? It just complains about everything, making it effectively useless as it just pollutes PRs with dozens of comments like this constantly everywhere.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 29, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 64.85%. Comparing base (823cfd4) to head (3fa3454).
Report is 30 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4639      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   65.05%   64.85%   -0.20%     
==========================================
  Files         304      127     -177     
  Lines       13950     4146    -9804     
==========================================
- Hits         9075     2689    -6386     
+ Misses       4875     1457    -3418     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from 97d938b to f302e1e Compare August 30, 2024 18:13
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: ./.github/actions/install
- uses: actions/setup-node@v3

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🟠 Code Vulnerability

Workflow depends on a GitHub actions pinned by tag (...read more)

Pin third party actions by hash, or at least by tag for trusted sources

When using a third party action, one needs to provide its GitHub path (owner/project) and can eventually pin it to a git ref (a branch name, a git tag, or a commit hash).

No pinned git ref means the action will use the latest commit of the default branch each time it runs, eventually running newer versions of the code that were not audited by Datadog. Specifying a git tag is better, but since they are not immutable, using a full length hash is recommended to make sure the action content is actually frozen to some reviewed state.

Be careful however, as even pinning an action by hash can be circumvented by attackers still. For instance, if an action relies on a Docker image which is itself not pinned to a digest, it becomes possible to alter its behaviour through the Docker image without actually changing its hash. You can learn more about this kind of attacks in Unpinnable Actions: How Malicious Code Can Sneak into Your GitHub Actions Workflows. Pinning actions by hash is still a good first line of defense against supply chain attacks.

Additionally, pinning by hash or tag means the action won’t benefit from newer version updates if any, including eventual security patches. Make sure to regularly check if newer versions for an action you use are available. For actions coming from a very trustworthy source, it can make sense to use a laxer pinning policy to benefit from updates as soon as possible.

View in Datadog  Leave us feedback  Documentation

@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from 98d2f89 to 1d4c5ed Compare August 30, 2024 19:07
@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch 2 times, most recently from f93c231 to 1bbc567 Compare September 11, 2024 20:47
tlhunter
tlhunter previously approved these changes Sep 11, 2024
Copy link
Member

@tlhunter tlhunter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems better than what we have today. That said I'm not sure how a developer can figure out how to fix things based on the resulting error.

@@ -147,3 +147,10 @@ jobs:
- run: yarn type:test
- run: yarn type:doc

verify-yaml:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this (and the name of the script file too) could use a more descriptive name of what it's doing. Something like verify-plugin-versions or anything more descriptive.

rochdev
rochdev previously approved these changes Sep 12, 2024
@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from b6d1e93 to c4078f3 Compare December 12, 2024 18:44
@bengl bengl enabled auto-merge (squash) December 12, 2024 18:44
@bengl bengl requested a review from a team as a code owner December 12, 2024 21:37
@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from b4c28fe to c334ed9 Compare December 12, 2024 22:14
@bengl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bengl commented Dec 12, 2024

Note that this now removes support (i.e. no longer instruments) Next.js >=12.0.0 <12.2.0 Since the tests won't run (because next build does not successfully run).

tlhunter
tlhunter previously approved these changes Dec 12, 2024
@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from c334ed9 to 5a4d6a9 Compare December 13, 2024 16:58
@bengl bengl force-pushed the bengl/verify-yaml branch from 3fa3454 to 2fcd426 Compare December 13, 2024 17:41
@rochdev
Copy link
Member

rochdev commented Dec 13, 2024

Note that this now removes support (i.e. no longer instruments) Next.js >=12.0.0 <12.2.0 Since the tests won't run (because next build does not successfully run).

Do you know why they won't run? According to Next documentation, Next 12 supports Node.js >=12.

include:
- node-version: 14 # yes, out of range, but the only way to test the oldest version
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Doesn't that mean that this version isn't supported anymore?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We'd have to take it out of instrumentation as well, not just the GitHub yaml. Meaning we'd never attempt to to instrument those versions. Is that fine?

file: 'dist/next-server/server/serve-static.js'
}, serveStatic => shimmer.wrap(serveStatic, 'serveStatic', wrapServeStatic))

addHook({ name: 'next', versions: ['>=11.1'], file: 'dist/server/next-server.js' }, nextServer => {
addHook({ name: 'next', versions: ['>=11.1 <12.0.0', '>=12.2.0'], file: 'dist/server/next-server.js' }, nextServer => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a breaking change.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For the versions removed from the range (12.0.x and 12.1.x), next build fails, so the tests fail. It doesn't appear that we can test these versions (or that we ever could) so the claim of support was always incorrect.

tlhunter
tlhunter previously approved these changes Dec 13, 2024
@bengl bengl merged commit baf22d9 into master Dec 13, 2024
294 of 300 checks passed
@bengl bengl deleted the bengl/verify-yaml branch December 13, 2024 21:17
@rochdev rochdev mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2024
rochdev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2024
* add script to verify plugin yaml

* add github actions job to verify yaml

* fix instrumentations

* fix up aerospike

* better version ranges for aerospike

* fix ci script

* make it pass hopefully

* update license 3rdparty

* fix it no longer assuming nodejs versions

* fix aerospike

* since node version is now ignored, run on only one version of node
@rochdev rochdev mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2024
rochdev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2024
* add script to verify plugin yaml

* add github actions job to verify yaml

* fix instrumentations

* fix up aerospike

* better version ranges for aerospike

* fix ci script

* make it pass hopefully

* update license 3rdparty

* fix it no longer assuming nodejs versions

* fix aerospike

* since node version is now ignored, run on only one version of node
rochdev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
* add script to verify plugin yaml

* add github actions job to verify yaml

* fix instrumentations

* fix up aerospike

* better version ranges for aerospike

* fix ci script

* make it pass hopefully

* update license 3rdparty

* fix it no longer assuming nodejs versions

* fix aerospike

* since node version is now ignored, run on only one version of node
rochdev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
* add script to verify plugin yaml

* add github actions job to verify yaml

* fix instrumentations

* fix up aerospike

* better version ranges for aerospike

* fix ci script

* make it pass hopefully

* update license 3rdparty

* fix it no longer assuming nodejs versions

* fix aerospike

* since node version is now ignored, run on only one version of node
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.

4 participants