reviewdog
gosec
reviewdog | gosec | |
---|---|---|
12 | 20 | |
7,425 | 7,499 | |
1.9% | 1.3% | |
9.5 | 8.7 | |
5 days ago | 7 days ago | |
Go | Go | |
MIT License | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
reviewdog
-
Code reviews and Suggestions from SARIF report
I build a general converter from SARIF to Reviewdog Diagnostic Format (RDFormat), then use Reviewdog to give suggested code changes as well as the context of the changes for PR reviewing.
-
My CNCF LFX Mentorship Spring 2023 Project at Kubescape
I helped improve the Kubescape GitHub Actions fix suggestions code review process, where I created the workflow which works by collecting the SARIF (Static Analysis Results Interchange Format) file that kubescape generates. Then, with the help of HollowMan6/sarif4reviewdog, convert the SARIF file into RDFormat (Reviewdog Diagnostic Format) and generate reviews for code fix suggestions on GitHub Actions using Reviewdog. I also helped add the “fix" object support for the Kubescape-generated SARIF report.
- Reviewdog: Code analysis regardless of programming language
-
Goast: Generic static analysis for Go Abstract Syntax Tree by OPA/Rego
Static analysis should be performed continuously by CI (Continuous Integration) to prevent unintentional inclusion of code. The JSON output schema is compatible with reviewdog and can be used as is in reviewdog.
-
reviewdog-gitlab-webhook: Trigger reviewdog checks for GitLab repo using webhooks
Trigger reviewdog checks on a repository via GitLab webhook rather than CI job.
-
How to reuse steps in Tekton tasks
# parameters - op: add path: /spec/params/- value: name: report-file default: reportfile description: Report file with errors - op: add path: /spec/params/- value: name: format default: golint description: Format of error input from the task - op: add path: /spec/params/- value: name: reporter default: local description: Reporter type for reviewdog https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog#reporters - op: add path: /spec/params/- value: name: diff default: git diff FETCH_HEAD description: Diff command https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog#reporters # workspaces - op: add path: /spec/workspaces/- value: name: token description: | Workspace which contains a token file for Github Pull Request comments. Must have a token file with the Github API access token # steps - op: add path: /spec/steps/- value: name: reviewdog-report image: golangci/golangci-lint:v1.31-alpine # both have the same workspace name workingDir: $(workspaces.source.path) script: | #!/bin/sh set -ue wget -O - -q https://raw.githubusercontent.com/reviewdog/reviewdog/master/install.sh | sh -s -- -b $(go env GOPATH)/bin export REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN=$(cat $(workspaces.token.path)/token) cat $(params.reportfile) | reviewdog -f=$(params.format) -diff="$(params.diff)"
-
I manage my dev.to blog in GitHub repository
In reference article, use prettier to format the markdown and the code snippets. I implement a text review using textlint and reviewdog in addition to that.
-
Automated code review for on-prem
JetBrains Qodana is one option, but currently requires glue code to map the findings to MR comments. I'm using reviewdog for it but I'm hoping they'll eventually fix it to have native integration
-
GitHub Action to annotate tsc errors;
I'm trying to make a GitHub action which automatically runs tsc to find TypeScript errors. Those errors should be annotated inline in the PR/Commits. I found reviewdog, which should work perfectly for this - but I played around with that for about 4 hours now and can't seem to get it to report errors successfully. tsc exits with code 2, but reviewdog still says that everything went fine. So I'm trying to find another solution for this, has anyone here done this before? For comparison, I managed to do the same thing with ESLint by adding a custom formatter to the eslint command (-f param), which then gets automatically picked up by the GitHub action - but I can't find something similar for tsc..
-
Incident with GitHub Actions, Issues, Pull Requests, and Webhooks
I used ReviewDog to wire in Qodana results, so I hear you about wishing it was built in, but it is achievable: https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog#reporter-gitlab-merge...
Based on my contact with GitLab's built-in other scanning tools, I wouldn't trust their vuln management further than I could throw it, so you're likely not missing much on that front
gosec
-
Secure Randomness in Go 1.22
For those unaware, gosec (and by extension golangci-lint) will warn about uses of `math/rand`
https://github.com/securego/gosec/blob/d3b2359ae29fe344f4df5...
-
Top 10 Snyk Alternatives for Code Security
6. Gosec
-
Safety in Go
You can (and definitely should!) also use gosec.
-
We have getrandom at home
The crypto source in Go is great, no complaints there. Lints like gosec even recommend using it when generating crypto entropy. Go did a good job here, and I expect Rust will do the same sometime after getrandom reaches 1.0 so the API questions are settled, plus whatever makes sense for the future-proofing the standard library needs.
-
any open source that checks security vulnerabilities in code?
i think there's https://github.com/securego/gosec linter
-
Goast: Generic static analysis for Go Abstract Syntax Tree by OPA/Rego
Various static analysis tools are available for the Go language, and existing static analysis tools can check general best practices. For example, gosec is a tool to check secure Go coding, and I use it myself. However, coding rules in software development are not only based on best practices, but can also be software- or team-specific. For example
-
Vulnerability Management for Go
What's the difference between this a https://github.com/securego/gosec?
-
Github template for Golang services
A github actions workflow is provided to run go fmt, vet, test and gosec. An initial configuration for dependabot is also provided.
- gosec
-
What tools exists, or you recommend, for code review, quality and/or security review
Besides what was mentioned, we use : staticcheck.io and https://github.com/securego/gosec
What are some alternatives?
Qodana - 📝 Source repository of Qodana Help
golangci-lint - Fast linters runner for Go
prettier - Prettier is an opinionated code formatter.
gokart - A static analysis tool for securing Go code
datree - Prevent Kubernetes misconfigurations from reaching production (again 😤 )! From code to cloud, Datree provides an E2E policy enforcement solution to run automatic checks for rule violations. See our docs: https://hub.datree.io
go-tools - Staticcheck - The advanced Go linter
kube-score - Kubernetes object analysis with recommendations for improved reliability and security. kube-score actively prevents downtime and bugs in your Kubernetes YAML and Charts. Static code analysis for Kubernetes.
pre-commit-golang - Pre-commit hooks for Golang with support for monorepos, the ability to pass arguments and environment variables to all hooks, and the ability to invoke custom go tools.
ls-lint - An extremely fast directory and filename linter - Bring some structure to your project filesystem
docker-bench-security - The Docker Bench for Security is a script that checks for dozens of common best-practices around deploying Docker containers in production.
editorconfig-vim - EditorConfig plugin for Vim
rustsec - RustSec API & Tooling