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

[BUG] com.google.code.findbugs/[email protected] version problem #705

Open
rubensa opened this issue Apr 23, 2024 · 13 comments
Open

[BUG] com.google.code.findbugs/[email protected] version problem #705

rubensa opened this issue Apr 23, 2024 · 13 comments

Comments

@rubensa
Copy link

rubensa commented Apr 23, 2024

Describe the bug
I have:

      ...
      <dependency>
        <!--
          Standard annotations (such as @NonNull) that can be applied to Java programs to assist tools that
        detect software defects.
          https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=305
        -->
        <groupId>com.google.code.findbugs</groupId>
        <artifactId>jsr305</artifactId>
        <version>3.0.2</version>
      </dependency>
      ...

as a dependency in my pom.xml.

I'm getting following problem message from Red Hat Dependency Analytics Plugin:

com.google.code.findbugs/[email protected]

osv-nvd(osv-nvd) vulnerability info:
Known security vulnerabilities: 0
Recommendation: com.google.code.findbugs/[email protected]

VSCode:

  • OS: Ubuntu 22.04
  • VSCode version: 1.88.1
  • Dependency Analytics Version: v0.9.4

Additional context
I tried to use com.google.code.findbugs/[email protected] version but looks it is only available in Red Hat Early Access repository (but not in Maven Central).

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

ruromero commented May 2, 2024

Hi @rubensa
It's also available in the GA repository

You have to add the GA Red Hat Repository to your Maven repositories in the settings.xml file, you can find the instructions here

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented May 13, 2024

@ruromero Thanks for the info

But the thing is, why the extension is proposing a fix for a 0 vulnerabilities package and the proposed package is not from maven central but from other repository (whereas the original one is in maven central)?
And, where is the source code and changeset for the proposed Red Hat package version to check if that change makes sense or not?

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @rubensa
It's a recommendation of a Red Hat alternative that will bring you better support and more frequent patches. You can expect vulnerabilities to be reported earlier in RH supported packages and be notified about vulnerable packages from the Red Hat security data feeds.
Besides, packages pushed to the RH repository have been certified and signed by RH whereas Maven Central can host any package from any developer.
The source code is also available in the RH repository but we're not providing the specific changeset that justifies in any way any functional benefit of using it.

That's why it is underlined in blue, meaning that it's just a suggestion.

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented May 15, 2024

@ruromero
Thank you for the info.

Could you provide me the URL for the RH repository with the source code?

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

Definitely! In the same Maven repository you can find all the sources.
This is the source code of the artifact mentioned in the issue com.google.findbugs:jsr305:3.0.2.redhat-00018

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented May 15, 2024

Thanks @ruromero but was meaning the source code repository (GitHub or something?) 😓

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

For this specific package I honestly don't know. The pom says the source control management is at http://findbugs.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ but this link is not working.

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented May 15, 2024

I think that is cause the code in googlecode repository is now archived: https://code.google.com/archive/p/findbugs/source/default/source

It was, at sometime, moved to GitHub: https://github.com/findbugsproject/findbugs

But currently, the development is done in new GitHub project: https://github.com/spotbugs/spotbugs

The thing here is that, all those source code repositories, are for the original project code, not the RedHat "modified" code...

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

@rubensa I'm afraid I can't give you a proper answer. Red Hat modified code is sometimes managed in internal repositories although the packages published include the source.

Why do you think this is a relevant information in this extension?

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented Aug 6, 2024

@ruromero I think it is relevant as the extension is suggesting to replace the Google FindBugs dependency to a "custom" RedHat implementation dependency that is not available in default Maven (Central) repository, so it implies adding Red Hat Early Access repository and without a clear reason for that suggestion, as there seems to be no vulnerabilities in Google FindBugs implementation (remember that the message says Known security vulnerabilities: 0).

@ruromero
Copy link
Contributor

ruromero commented Aug 6, 2024

To be precise, we're suggesting to add the Red Hat GA repository. The reasons were stated few comments above, let me know if they're not clear. Some companies/teams usually have a set of whitelisted/trusted sources for repositories that might not be limited only to Maven Central.
If I am understanding correctly, your concern was the lack of a direct reference to the repository source. Is that right? As I mentioned, I don't think we can implement adding this information at the moment.

What the tool is trying to achieve with the recommendations is to get more users to use the Red Hat supported software but maybe if you don't want to have Red Hat Recommendations you might find useful an option to disable them?

Thanks for your interest.

@rubensa
Copy link
Author

rubensa commented Sep 4, 2024

Thanks @ruromero, an option to disable this kind of recommendations would be fine to us.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants
@ruromero @rubensa @sabalza and others