This patch fixes this problem. Sorry for my additional spam. https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/209573
Peter From: Colin <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2025 16:40 To: Marko, Peter (FT D EU SK BFS1) <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 1/1] cve-check: Rework patch parsing Actually, the test I added was wrong, I was asserting equal to set("CVE-2023-33460") instead of {"CVE-2023-33460"} in my test case. Back to square one... Colin On Sat, Jan 11, 2025 at 9:25 AM Colin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Peter, I'm currently looking at this. I added CVE-2023-33460.patch to test_parse_cve_from_patch_contents and ran oe-selftest. I see the issue why these patches are no longer being marked as solved. 2025-01-11 15:17:33,396 - oe-selftest - INFO - ====================================================================== 2025-01-11 15:17:33,396 - oe-selftest - INFO - FAIL: test_parse_cve_from_patch_contents (cve_check.CVECheck) 2025-01-11 15:17:33,397 - oe-selftest - INFO - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2025-01-11 15:17:33,397 - oe-selftest - INFO - Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/colin/development/yocto/poky/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py", line 209, in test_parse_cve_from_patch_contents self.assertEqual( AssertionError: Items in the first set but not the second: 'CVE-2023-33460' Items in the second set but not the first: 'E' '2' 'V' 'C' '-' '0' '4' '3' '6' 2025-01-11 15:17:33,397 - oe-selftest - INFO - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 2025-01-11 15:17:33,397 - oe-selftest - INFO - Ran 1 test in 0.247s 2025-01-11 15:17:33,398 - oe-selftest - INFO - FAILED 2025-01-11 15:17:33,398 - oe-selftest - INFO - (failures=1) 2025-01-11 15:17:46,988 - oe-selftest - INFO - RESULTS: 2025-01-11 15:17:46,988 - oe-selftest - INFO - RESULTS - cve_check.CVECheck.test_parse_cve_from_patch_contents: FAILED (0.02s) 2025-01-11 15:17:46,996 - oe-selftest - INFO - SUMMARY: 2025-01-11 15:17:46,996 - oe-selftest - INFO - oe-selftest () - Ran 1 test in 0.249s 2025-01-11 15:17:46,996 - oe-selftest - INFO - oe-selftest - FAIL - Required tests failed (successes=0, skipped=0, failures=1, errors=0) For some reason the CVE string itself is getting put into a set, instead of the full string being placed into a set. I'll track down where this is happening and push up a fix, including adding this update to the test. Not sure why I didn't add a test case with a single CVE ID in the patch contents...This was my mistake and I apologize. Sorry for any inconveniences I caused. Best, Colin On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 3:26 AM Marko, Peter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Looking at the reopened CVEs in meta-oe, I can't understand why are some reported. $ grep -rI CVE-2023-33460 ./ ./meta-oe/recipes-devtools/yajl/yajl/CVE-2023-33460.patch:CVE: CVE-2023-33460 ./meta-oe/recipes-devtools/yajl/yajl_2.1.0.bb<http://yajl_2.1.0.bb>: file://CVE-2023-33460.patch \ $ grep -rI CVE-2020-29074 ./ ./meta-oe/recipes-graphics/x11vnc/files/CVE-2020-29074.patch:CVE: CVE-2020-29074 ./meta-oe/recipes-graphics/x11vnc/x11vnc_0.9.16.bb<http://x11vnc_0.9.16.bb>: file://CVE-2020-29074.patch \ These look good to me, but they are not matched anymore and show as open. Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > <openembedded- > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of > Peter Marko via > lists.openembedded.org<http://lists.openembedded.org> > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 10:21 > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 1/1] cve-check: Rework patch parsing > > Or should we rather rename all those patches which violate current code? > What is then the meaning of CVE: tag within the patch if it's not used but > it's > enforced? > We should probably remove cve_payload_tag handling from > test_cve_tag_format... > > Peter > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > <openembedded- > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf > > Of Peter Marko via > > lists.openembedded.org<http://lists.openembedded.org> > > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 9:34 > > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; openembedded- > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 1/1] cve-check: Rework patch parsing > > > > Hello, > > > > This patch has caused a regression in detecting cve patches. > > Master jumped by 32 CVEs after merging this commit. > > These are for sure patched but it's not detected anymore. > > See https://valkyrie.yocto.io/pub/non-release/patchmetrics/ > > (master should be identical to scarthgap/styhead except for kernel CVEs) > > > > Reports cannot be used anymore for picking CVEs for TODO list. > > So this patch should be reverted or fixed. > > > > Peter > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: > > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > > <openembedded- > > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On > > > Behalf Of Colin McAllister via > > > lists.openembedded.org<http://lists.openembedded.org> > > > Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 20:22 > > > To: > > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > > > Cc: Colin McAllister <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > Subject: [OE-core] [PATCH v2 1/1] cve-check: Rework patch parsing > > > > > > The cve_check functionality to parse CVE IDs from the patch filename and > > > patch contents have been reworked to improve parsing and also utilize > > > tests. This ensures that the parsing works as intended. > > > > > > Additionally, the new patched_cves dict has a few issues I tried to fix > > > as well. If multiple patch files exist for a single CVE ID, only the > > > last one will show up with the "resource" key. The value for the > > > "resource" key has been updated to hold a list and return all patch > > > files associated with a given CVE ID. Also, at the end of > > > get_patch_cves, CVE_STATUS can overwrite an existing entry in the dict. > > > This could cause an issue, for example, if a CVE has been addressed via > > > a patch, but a CVE_STATUS line also exists that ignores the given CVE > > > ID. A warning has been added if this ever happens. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Colin McAllister > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > --- > > > > > > I noticed that there are some patches, especially in older verisons of > > > Yocto, where the "CVE: " tag was used with multiple CVE IDs in different > > > formats, like "CVE-YYYY-XXXX & CVE-YYYY-XXXX" or > > > "CVE-YYYY-XXXX, CVE-YYYY-XXXX". Currently, only space-delimited CVE > > > IDs will be parsed, but documentation doesn't indicate that is the only > > > supported format. I figured it'd be nice to update the code to be able > > > to support multiple formats, that way this patch could be backported to > > > fix those patches. I also wanted to add unit tests to ensure the patch > > > parsing behavior is preserved. > > > > > > I'd also like to update the patch filename parsing to parse multiple CVE > > > IDs from the filename, but based on the comments, it seems like there > > > was a reason why only the last CVE ID is extracted from the filename. > > > I'd be happy to submit a V2 patch or an additional patch to update the > > > function if that sounds good for the maintainers. > > > > > > V2 Changes: > > > I mistakenly created this patch without fb3f440 applied. I updated > > > get_patched_cves to return a dict instead of a set. > > > > > > I also improved the docstrings for these new functions to be more > > > descriptive and also specify the return types. > > > > > > I also found a few issues with the dictionary object created by > > > get_patched_cves that have now been addressed in this commit. > > > > > > meta/lib/oe/cve_check.py | 166 ++++++++++++------ > > > meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py | 205 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 317 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oe/cve_check.py b/meta/lib/oe/cve_check.py > > > index 280f9f613d..85a899a880 100644 > > > --- a/meta/lib/oe/cve_check.py > > > +++ b/meta/lib/oe/cve_check.py > > > @@ -5,9 +5,11 @@ > > > # > > > > > > import collections > > > -import re > > > -import itertools > > > import functools > > > +import itertools > > > +import os.path > > > +import re > > > +import oe.patch > > > > > > _Version = collections.namedtuple( > > > "_Version", ["release", "patch_l", "pre_l", "pre_v"] > > > @@ -71,76 +73,132 @@ def _cmpkey(release, patch_l, pre_l, pre_v): > > > return _release, _patch, _pre > > > > > > > > > -def get_patched_cves(d): > > > +def parse_cve_from_filename(patch_filename): > > > """ > > > - Get patches that solve CVEs using the "CVE: " tag. > > > + Parses CVE ID from the filename > > > + > > > + Matches the last "CVE-YYYY-ID" in the file name, also if written > > > + in lowercase. Possible to have multiple CVE IDs in a single > > > + file name, but only the last one will be detected from the file name. > > > + > > > + Returns the last CVE ID foudn in the filename. If no CVE ID is found > > > + an empty string is returned. > > > """ > > > + cve_file_name_match = re.compile(r".*(CVE-\d{4}-\d{4,})", > > > re.IGNORECASE) > > > > > > - import re > > > - import oe.patch > > > + # Check patch file name for CVE ID > > > + fname_match = cve_file_name_match.search(patch_filename) > > > + return fname_match.group(1).upper() if fname_match else "" > > > > > > - cve_match = re.compile(r"CVE:( CVE-\d{4}-\d+)+") > > > > > > - # Matches the last "CVE-YYYY-ID" in the file name, also if written > > > - # in lowercase. Possible to have multiple CVE IDs in a single > > > - # file name, but only the last one will be detected from the file > > > name. > > > - # However, patch files contents addressing multiple CVE IDs are > > supported > > > - # (cve_match regular expression) > > > - cve_file_name_match = re.compile(r".*(CVE-\d{4}-\d+)", > > re.IGNORECASE) > > > +def parse_cves_from_patch_contents(patch_contents): > > > + """ > > > + Parses CVE IDs from patch contents > > > > > > + Matches all CVE IDs contained on a line that starts with "CVE: ". Any > > > + delimiter (',', '&', "and", etc.) can be used without any issues. > > > Multiple > > > + "CVE:" lines can also exist. > > > + > > > + Returns a set of all CVE IDs found in the patch contents. > > > + """ > > > + cve_ids = set() > > > + cve_match = re.compile(r"CVE-\d{4}-\d{4,}") > > > + # Search for one or more "CVE: " lines > > > + for line in patch_contents.split("\n"): > > > + if not line.startswith("CVE:"): > > > + continue > > > + cve_ids.update(cve_match.findall(line)) > > > + return cve_ids > > > + > > > + > > > +def parse_cves_from_patch_file(patch_file): > > > + """ > > > + Parses CVE IDs associated with a particular patch file, using both > > > the > > > filename > > > + and patch contents. > > > + > > > + Returns a set of all CVE IDs found in the patch filename and > > > contents. > > > + """ > > > + cve_ids = set() > > > + filename_cve = parse_cve_from_filename(patch_file) > > > + if filename_cve: > > > + bb.debug(2, "Found %s from patch file name %s" % (filename_cve, > > > patch_file)) > > > + cve_ids.add(parse_cve_from_filename(patch_file)) > > > + > > > + # Remote patches won't be present and compressed patches won't be > > > + # unpacked, so say we're not scanning them > > > + if not os.path.isfile(patch_file): > > > + bb.note("%s is remote or compressed, not scanning content" % > > > patch_file) > > > + return cve_ids > > > + > > > + with open(patch_file, "r", encoding="utf-8") as f: > > > + try: > > > + patch_text = f.read() > > > + except UnicodeDecodeError: > > > + bb.debug( > > > + 1, > > > + "Failed to read patch %s using UTF-8 encoding" > > > + " trying with iso8859-1" % patch_file, > > > + ) > > > + f.close() > > > + with open(patch_file, "r", encoding="iso8859-1") as f: > > > + patch_text = f.read() > > > + > > > + cve_ids.update(parse_cves_from_patch_contents(patch_text)) > > > + > > > + if not cve_ids: > > > + bb.debug(2, "Patch %s doesn't solve CVEs" % patch_file) > > > + else: > > > + bb.debug(2, "Patch %s solves %s" % (patch_file, ", > > > ".join(sorted(cve_ids)))) > > > + > > > + return cve_ids > > > + > > > + > > > +def get_patched_cves(d): > > > + """ > > > + Determines the CVE IDs that have been solved by either patches > incuded > > > within > > > + SRC_URI or by setting CVE_STATUS. > > > + > > > + Returns a dictionary with the CVE IDs as keys and an associated > dictonary > > > of > > > + relevant metadata as the value. > > > + """ > > > patched_cves = {} > > > patches = oe.patch.src_patches(d) > > > bb.debug(2, "Scanning %d patches for CVEs" % len(patches)) > > > + > > > + # Check each patch file > > > for url in patches: > > > patch_file = bb.fetch.decodeurl(url)[2] > > > - > > > - # Check patch file name for CVE ID > > > - fname_match = cve_file_name_match.search(patch_file) > > > - if fname_match: > > > - cve = fname_match.group(1).upper() > > > - patched_cves[cve] = {"abbrev-status": "Patched", "status": > > > "fix-file- > > > included", "resource": patch_file} > > > - bb.debug(2, "Found %s from patch file name %s" % (cve, > patch_file)) > > > - > > > - # Remote patches won't be present and compressed patches won't be > > > - # unpacked, so say we're not scanning them > > > - if not os.path.isfile(patch_file): > > > - bb.note("%s is remote or compressed, not scanning content" % > > > patch_file) > > > - continue > > > - > > > - with open(patch_file, "r", encoding="utf-8") as f: > > > - try: > > > - patch_text = f.read() > > > - except UnicodeDecodeError: > > > - bb.debug(1, "Failed to read patch %s using UTF-8 > > > encoding" > > > - " trying with iso8859-1" % patch_file) > > > - f.close() > > > - with open(patch_file, "r", encoding="iso8859-1") as f: > > > - patch_text = f.read() > > > - > > > - # Search for one or more "CVE: " lines > > > - text_match = False > > > - for match in cve_match.finditer(patch_text): > > > - # Get only the CVEs without the "CVE: " tag > > > - cves = patch_text[match.start()+5:match.end()] > > > - for cve in cves.split(): > > > - bb.debug(2, "Patch %s solves %s" % (patch_file, cve)) > > > - patched_cves[cve] = {"abbrev-status": "Patched", > > > "status": "fix- > file- > > > included", "resource": patch_file} > > > - text_match = True > > > - > > > - if not fname_match and not text_match: > > > - bb.debug(2, "Patch %s doesn't solve CVEs" % patch_file) > > > + for cve_id in parse_cves_from_patch_file(patch_file): > > > + if cve_id not in patched_cves: > > > + { > > > + "abbrev-status": "Patched", > > > + "status": "fix-file-included", > > > + "resource": [patch_file], > > > + } > > > + else: > > > + patched_cves[cve_id]["resource"].append(patch_file) > > > > > > # Search for additional patched CVEs > > > - for cve in (d.getVarFlags("CVE_STATUS") or {}): > > > - decoded_status = decode_cve_status(d, cve) > > > + for cve_id in d.getVarFlags("CVE_STATUS") or {}: > > > + decoded_status = decode_cve_status(d, cve_id) > > > products = d.getVar("CVE_PRODUCT") > > > - if has_cve_product_match(decoded_status, products) == True: > > > - patched_cves[cve] = { > > > + if has_cve_product_match(decoded_status, products): > > > + if cve_id in patched_cves: > > > + bb.warn( > > > + 'CVE_STATUS[%s] = "%s" is overwriting previous > > > status of "%s: > > %s"' > > > + % ( > > > + cve_id, > > > + d.getVarFlag("CVE_STATUS", cve_id), > > > + patched_cves[cve_id]["abbrev-status"], > > > + patched_cves[cve_id]["status"], > > > + ) > > > + ) > > > + patched_cves[cve_id] = { > > > "abbrev-status": decoded_status["mapping"], > > > "status": decoded_status["detail"], > > > "justification": decoded_status["description"], > > > "affected-vendor": decoded_status["vendor"], > > > - "affected-product": decoded_status["product"] > > > + "affected-product": decoded_status["product"], > > > } > > > > > > return patched_cves > > > diff --git a/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py > > > b/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py > > > index 3dd3e89d3e..511e4b81b4 100644 > > > --- a/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py > > > +++ b/meta/lib/oeqa/selftest/cases/cve_check.py > > > @@ -120,6 +120,211 @@ class CVECheck(OESelftestTestCase): > > > self.assertEqual(has_cve_product_match(status, "test > > > glibca:glibc"), > > True) > > > self.assertEqual(has_cve_product_match(status, "glibca:glibc > > > test"), > > True) > > > > > > + def test_parse_cve_from_patch_filename(self): > > > + from oe.cve_check import parse_cve_from_filename > > > + > > > + # Patch filename without CVE ID > > > + self.assertEqual(parse_cve_from_filename("0001-test.patch"), "") > > > + > > > + # Patch with single CVE ID > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2022-12345.patch"), "CVE-2022- > > > 12345" > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch with multiple CVE IDs > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2022-41741-CVE-2022- > > > 41742.patch"), > > > + "CVE-2022-41742", > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patches with CVE ID and appended text > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2023-3019-0001.patch"), "CVE- > > > 2023-3019" > > > + ) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2024-21886-1.patch"), "CVE- > 2024- > > > 21886" > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch with CVE ID and prepended text > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("grep-CVE-2012-5667.patch"), "CVE- > > 2012- > > > 5667" > > > + ) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("0001-CVE-2012-5667.patch"), "CVE- > > > 2012-5667" > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch with CVE ID and both prepended and appended text > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename( > > > + "0001-tpm2_import-fix-fixed-AES-key-CVE-2021-3565- > > 0001.patch" > > > + ), > > > + "CVE-2021-3565", > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Only grab the last CVE ID in the filename > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2012-5667-CVE-2012- > > 5668.patch"), > > > + "CVE-2012-5668", > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Test invalid CVE ID with incorrect length (must be at least 4 > > > digits) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2024-001.patch"), > > > + "", > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Test valid CVE ID with very long length > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cve_from_filename("CVE-2024- > > > 0000000000000000000000001.patch"), > > > + "CVE-2024-0000000000000000000000001", > > > + ) > > > + > > > + def test_parse_cve_from_patch_contents(self): > > > + import textwrap > > > + from oe.cve_check import parse_cves_from_patch_contents > > > + > > > + # Standard patch file excerpt without any patches > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cves_from_patch_contents( > > > + textwrap.dedent("""\ > > > + remove "*" for root since we don't have a /etc/shadow so far. > > > + > > > + Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [configuration] > > > + > > > + Signed-off-by: Scott Garman > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > + > > > + --- base-passwd/passwd.master~nobash > > > + +++ base-passwd/passwd.master > > > + @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > > > + -root:*:0:0:root:/root:/bin/sh > > > + +root::0:0:root:/root:/bin/sh > > > + daemon:*:1:1:daemon:/usr/sbin:/bin/sh > > > + bin:*:2:2:bin:/bin:/bin/sh > > > + sys:*:3:3:sys:/dev:/bin/sh > > > + """) > > > + ), > > > + set(), > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch file with multiple CVE IDs (space-separated) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cves_from_patch_contents( > > > + textwrap.dedent("""\ > > > + There is an assertion in function > > > _cairo_arc_in_direction(). > > > + > > > + CVE: CVE-2019-6461 CVE-2019-6462 > > > + Upstream-Status: Pending > > > + Signed-off-by: Ross Burton > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > + > > > + diff --git a/src/cairo-arc.c b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + index 390397bae..1bde774a4 100644 > > > + --- a/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + +++ b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + @@ -186,7 +186,8 @@ _cairo_arc_in_direction (cairo_t > > > *cr, > > > + if (cairo_status (cr)) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + - assert (angle_max >= angle_min); > > > + + if (angle_max < angle_min) > > > + + return; > > > + > > > + if (angle_max - angle_min > 2 * M_PI * > > > MAX_FULL_CIRCLES) { > > > + angle_max = fmod (angle_max - angle_min, 2 * M_PI); > > > + """), > > > + ), > > > + {"CVE-2019-6461", "CVE-2019-6462"}, > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch file with multiple CVE IDs (comma-separated w/ both space > and > > > no space) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cves_from_patch_contents( > > > + textwrap.dedent("""\ > > > + There is an assertion in function > > > _cairo_arc_in_direction(). > > > + > > > + CVE: CVE-2019-6461,CVE-2019-6462, CVE-2019-6463 > > > + Upstream-Status: Pending > > > + Signed-off-by: Ross Burton > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > + > > > + diff --git a/src/cairo-arc.c b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + index 390397bae..1bde774a4 100644 > > > + --- a/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + +++ b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + @@ -186,7 +186,8 @@ _cairo_arc_in_direction (cairo_t > > > *cr, > > > + if (cairo_status (cr)) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + - assert (angle_max >= angle_min); > > > + + if (angle_max < angle_min) > > > + + return; > > > + > > > + if (angle_max - angle_min > 2 * M_PI * > > > MAX_FULL_CIRCLES) { > > > + angle_max = fmod (angle_max - angle_min, 2 * M_PI); > > > + > > > + """), > > > + ), > > > + {"CVE-2019-6461", "CVE-2019-6462", "CVE-2019-6463"}, > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch file with multiple CVE IDs (&-separated) > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cves_from_patch_contents( > > > + textwrap.dedent("""\ > > > + There is an assertion in function > > > _cairo_arc_in_direction(). > > > + > > > + CVE: CVE-2019-6461 & CVE-2019-6462 > > > + Upstream-Status: Pending > > > + Signed-off-by: Ross Burton > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > + > > > + diff --git a/src/cairo-arc.c b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + index 390397bae..1bde774a4 100644 > > > + --- a/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + +++ b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + @@ -186,7 +186,8 @@ _cairo_arc_in_direction (cairo_t > > > *cr, > > > + if (cairo_status (cr)) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + - assert (angle_max >= angle_min); > > > + + if (angle_max < angle_min) > > > + + return; > > > + > > > + if (angle_max - angle_min > 2 * M_PI * > > > MAX_FULL_CIRCLES) { > > > + angle_max = fmod (angle_max - angle_min, 2 * M_PI); > > > + """), > > > + ), > > > + {"CVE-2019-6461", "CVE-2019-6462"}, > > > + ) > > > + > > > + # Patch file with multiple lines with CVE IDs > > > + self.assertEqual( > > > + parse_cves_from_patch_contents( > > > + textwrap.dedent("""\ > > > + There is an assertion in function > > > _cairo_arc_in_direction(). > > > + > > > + CVE: CVE-2019-6461 & CVE-2019-6462 > > > + > > > + CVE: CVE-2019-6463 & CVE-2019-6464 > > > + Upstream-Status: Pending > > > + Signed-off-by: Ross Burton > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > > > + > > > + diff --git a/src/cairo-arc.c b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + index 390397bae..1bde774a4 100644 > > > + --- a/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + +++ b/src/cairo-arc.c > > > + @@ -186,7 +186,8 @@ _cairo_arc_in_direction (cairo_t > > > *cr, > > > + if (cairo_status (cr)) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + - assert (angle_max >= angle_min); > > > + + if (angle_max < angle_min) > > > + + return; > > > + > > > + if (angle_max - angle_min > 2 * M_PI * > > > MAX_FULL_CIRCLES) { > > > + angle_max = fmod (angle_max - angle_min, 2 * M_PI); > > > + > > > + """), > > > + ), > > > + {"CVE-2019-6461", "CVE-2019-6462", "CVE-2019-6463", "CVE- > > > 2019-6464"}, > > > + ) > > > > > > def test_recipe_report_json(self): > > > config = """ > > > -- > > > 2.34.1
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#209670): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/209670 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/110347357/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
