semgrep VS Logback

Semgrep OSS Owner/Maintainer: Semgrep Age: First release on GitHub on February 6th, 2020 License: GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1

Semgrep - https://semgrep.dev

For the SAST stage, I used SonarQube tool. SonarQube is an open-source platform developed by SonarSource for continuous inspection of code quality to perform automatic reviews with static analysis of code to detect bugs and code smells on more than 30 programming languages. I preferred SonarQube instead of other SAST tools because it has a detailed documentation and plugins about integration with Jenkins and SonarQube works with Java projects pretty well. Of course you can similar multi-language-supported tools such as Semgrep or language-specific tools such as Bandit.

> Not sure I understand your point.

The problem is using Treesitter (for syntax highlighting and "semantic movements") and an LSP at the same time. So if your language has a LSP, using Treesitter additionally is redundant at best and introduces inconcistency at worst.

I'm not talking about using Treesitter as the parser for the LSP.

> Most popular languages have language-specific tools

I'd say even less popular langauges like Coq^H^H^HRocq, Lean 4, Koka, Idris, Unison, ... have their "own" tools, I do not know of a language that uses a Treesitter parser in its LSP, but I do know about tools like https://semgrep.dev/ (written in OCaml) and Github's code search which use Treesitter.

Well, when I seach for "semgrep", I get a very nice corporate landing page with a "Book Demo" button. Which is a level of hassle that just isn't worth it for smaller teams, because "Book Demo" usually means "We're going to try to do a dance to see how much money we can extract from you." Which smaller teams may only want to do for a handful of key tools.

(4 years ago, I was more willing to put up with enterprise licensing. But in the last two years, I've seen way too many enterprise vendors try to squeeze every penny they can get from existing clients. An enterprise sales process now often means "Expect 30% annual price hikes once you're in too deep to back out.")

There's also an open source "semgrep" project here: https://github.com/semgrep/semgrep. But this seems to be basically a vulernability scanner, going by the README.

Whereas AST-grep seems to focus heavily on things like:

1. One-off searching: "Search my tree for this pattern."

2. Refactoring: "Replace this pattern with this other pattern."

AST-grep also includes a vulnerability scanning mode like semgrep.

It's possible that semgrep also has nice support for (1) and (2), but it isn't clearly visible on their corporate landing page or the first open source README I found.

7. Semgrep

This project is a compilation of Semgrep rules derived from the OWASP Mobile Application Security Testing Guide (MASTG) specifically for Android applications. The aim is to enhance and support Mobile Application Penetration Testing (MAPT) activities conducted by the ethical hacker community. The primary objective of these rules is to address the static tests outlined in the OWASP MASTG.

Java -> Logback, Log4j2, JDK (Java Util Logging), Slf4j, e.t.c.

This is a GitHub link to my demo app. It’s simple Spring Boot web app used to debugging various stuff. There are many ways to configure JSON logging in Spring Boot. I decided to use Logback because it is easy to configure and one of the most widely used logging library in the Java Community. To enable JSON logging we need to add below dependencies.

Logback(https://logback.qos.ch/) is another non-commercial Java logging framework. It labels itself as a successor to the previously discussed Log4j framework.

> Then apache decides to put new people on log4j, do a backward incompatible v2 design that nevertheless is worse than slf4j. Why?

slf4j itself isn't a logging framework. It's a facade to logging frameworks.

Simple Logging Facade for Java ( https://www.slf4j.org )

It needs a logging framework behind it - log4j, log4j2, logback, commons, JUL.

The question is "why do log4j2?"

Logback went from the log4j1.x path ( https://logback.qos.ch )

Log4j2 has a lot of features that weren't present when the project started ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log4j#Apache_Log4j_2 ).

There is a licensing difference between Logback (LGPL) and Log4jx (Apache Commons).

Also, I'd like you to pay attention to the log consumer. You see, when the E2E scenario fails, it's not always obvious why. Sometimes to understand the source of the problem you have to dig into containers' logs. Thankfully the log consumer allows us to forward a container's logs to any SLF4J logger instance. In this project, containers' logs are forwarded to regular text files (you can find the Logback configuration in the repository). Though it's much better to transfer logs to external logging facility (e.g. Kibana).

This shows that the MariaDB JDBC driver uses Logback as a logging framework. Although Logback is not affected by Log4Shell, it has a related vulnerability (of much lesser severity, no need to panic) fixed in version 1.2.8 and 1.3.0-alpha11. I checked the version used by the connector and found that it used 1.3.0-alpha10. Even though Logback is included as a test dependency in the MariaDB driver, I sent a pull request on GitHub to update it. I encourage you to do the same in any open-source project you find and that includes a vulnerable dependency.

Dependencing on the project, changing the logger might range from easy peasy to a multi-week task. I'm ready to bet that in many (most?) cases, it'd actually be quite easy, so let's explore how to do it, using Logback as the target (there aren't that many alternatives actually).

behold logback doing a bunch of JNDI fixes: https://github.com/qos-ch/logback/commit/c43bd30e1092b89bb91f5fb6a28310956b3bac61