-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
add prowler v4 parser #10338
add prowler v4 parser #10338
Conversation
Hi there 👋, @DryRunSecurity here, below is a summary of our analysis and findings.
Note 🟢 Risk threshold not exceeded. Change Summary (click to expand)The following is a summary of changes in this pull request made by me, your security buddy 🤖. Note that this summary is auto-generated and not meant to be a definitive list of security issues but rather a helpful summary from a security perspective. Summary: This pull request contains several changes related to the integration of the AWS Prowler V4 security assessment tool in the DefectDojo application. The key changes include:
From an application security perspective, the key points to highlight are:
Overall, these changes appear to be a positive contribution to the security and functionality of the DefectDojo application, as they enhance the integration and processing of security findings from the AWS Prowler V4 tool. Files Changed:
Powered by DryRun Security |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
small typo
…it but use env vars
It seems that only 1 unit test in |
@kagahd We've had issues with those tests failing somewhat randomly. Give is a day or so to look into what's up with those tests before spending more time on this PR to try to make them pass. Thanks for the contribution and your patience as we sort out those misbehaving tests. |
It seems it's not a good idea to have multiple parsers for the same scanner even though the same scanner may have different report formats (e.g. For example, if you import a prowler v3 report and then import a semantically identical prowler v4 report, DefectDojo would not detect any duplicates because two different parsers, "tools", were used to import both reports. So I think the only viable solution to this problem is to implement only one parser, one "tool", for one scanner. That means that we would have only one parser, one "tool", for Prowler which must be agnostic of the different report formats that Prowler may produce or may have produced in former Prowler versions. |
Dear @mtesauro, @Maffooch, @manuel-sommer & all the DefectDojo team, I have a question regarding the implementation for only one Prowler parser for several report formats. How about renaming the parser What do you think of the idea or what would you suggest as the best solution? |
Hi @kagahd,
Thus, maybe you can:
If you do it this way, you might have to add a migrationsfile if you rename the parser name, e.g. look at #9355 or #9522. Does this help you? |
Indeed, that helps, thanks a lot for the pointers, @manuel-sommer! |
I close this PR in favor of PR #10372 |
add prowler v4 parser