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

change used zip lib #24

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

change used zip lib #24

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

MatteoDelOmbra
Copy link

@MatteoDelOmbra MatteoDelOmbra commented Dec 13, 2024

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Updated changelogs for Frends.Zip.CreateArchive and Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive to version 1.2.0.
    • Enhanced zip creation and extraction functionality with the new library ProDotNetZip.
    • Added a project URL for both Frends.Zip.CreateArchive and Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Resolved issues related to file extraction paths in the previous version.
  • Chores

    • Updated the underlying library from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip for both projects due to security concerns.

@MatteoDelOmbra MatteoDelOmbra linked an issue Dec 13, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@MatteoDelOmbra MatteoDelOmbra self-assigned this Dec 13, 2024
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 13, 2024

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@MatteoDelOmbra has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 25 minutes and 30 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 77f97ac and 2bbe498.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (2 hunks)

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces updates to two components, Frends.Zip.CreateArchive and Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive, both transitioning from the DotNetZip library to ProDotNetZip due to security concerns. Each component's changelog has been updated to reflect the new version 1.2.0, released on December 13, 2024. The project files for both components have been modified to update the version number and the package reference, with Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive also adding a project URL.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md Updated to version [1.2.0] with a note on transitioning from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip due to security concerns.
Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj Updated version from 1.1.0 to 1.2.0; replaced DotNetZip with ProDotNetZip (version 1.20.0); added PackageProjectUrl with value https://frends.com/.
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md Updated to version [1.2.0] noting the replacement of DotNetZip with ProDotNetZip for security reasons.
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj Updated version from 1.1.0 to 1.2.0; replaced DotNetZip with ProDotNetZip (version 1.20.0); added PackageProjectUrl with value https://frends.com/.

Possibly related PRs

  • ZIP.ExtractArchive - Bug fix #22: The changes in the main PR and this PR both involve the transition from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip due to security concerns, and both updates include the addition of the DeleteZipFileAfterExtract option, indicating a direct connection in functionality and library usage.

Suggested reviewers

  • ttossavainen

Poem

🐰 In the meadow where zip files play,
A new library hops in today.
ProDotNetZip, so secure and bright,
Replacing DotNet, a wise new sight.
With changelogs updated, we cheer and sing,
For safer archives, let the joy take wing! 🌼


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@MatteoDelOmbra MatteoDelOmbra requested a review from jefim December 13, 2024 10:43
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj (1)

27-27: Ensure comprehensive testing after library switch

Switching ZIP libraries is a significant change that requires:

  1. Comprehensive testing of all ZIP extraction scenarios
  2. Verification of backward compatibility with existing archives
  3. Performance comparison with the previous implementation
  4. Documentation updates to reflect any API changes

Consider adding integration tests that cover various archive formats and edge cases.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 367edd3 and 4a3a215.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj (2 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj (2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md
🔇 Additional comments (4)
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj (1)

27-27: Verify the security and stability of ProDotNetZip

While the switch from DotNetZip is motivated by security concerns, we should verify:

  1. The legitimacy and maintenance status of the ProDotNetZip package
  2. Whether version 1.20.0 is the latest stable release
  3. Any known security vulnerabilities in this version
✅ Verification successful

Update to the latest version 1.20.0 is appropriate and secure

The verification results show:

  • ProDotNetZip is actively maintained with regular releases (5 versions in 2024)
  • Version 1.20.0 (December 5, 2024) is indeed the latest version
  • A HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability was found in versions < 1.19.0
  • The vulnerability has been patched in version 1.19.0 and later
  • The PR is using version 1.20.0, which is secure against the known vulnerability
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify ProDotNetZip package information and security status

# Check NuGet package information
curl -s https://api.nuget.org/v3/registration5-semver1/prodotnetzip/index.json | jq '.items[0].items[].catalogEntry | {version, published}'

# Check GitHub security advisories
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  securityVulnerabilities(first: 5, ecosystem: NUGET, package: "ProDotNetZip") {
    nodes {
      advisory {
        summary
        severity
        publishedAt
      }
      vulnerableVersionRange
      firstPatchedVersion {
        identifier
      }
    }
  }
}'

Length of output: 1063

Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj (2)

14-14: LGTM! Version bump follows semantic versioning

The patch version increment (1.1.0 → 1.1.1) is appropriate for a security-related library change.


27-27: Verify the security and compatibility of ProDotNetZip

While addressing security concerns is important, we need to verify several aspects of this library change:

Please ensure:

  1. This is the latest stable version of ProDotNetZip
  2. The library maintains API compatibility with DotNetZip
  3. No known vulnerabilities exist in version 1.20.0
  4. Integration tests pass with the new library

Consider documenting the security concerns that prompted this change in the changelog or commit message for future reference.

✅ Verification successful

Let me analyze the API usage to ensure compatibility before making a final decision.


Package change to ProDotNetZip 1.20.0 is appropriate and secure

The switch to ProDotNetZip is justified based on the following findings:

  • It's a legitimate fork of DotNetZip specifically focused on fixing vulnerabilities and .NET Standard compatibility
  • Version 1.20.0 is the latest available version
  • It's safe from the known high-severity directory traversal vulnerability (patched in 1.19.0)
  • The API compatibility is maintained as both packages use the same Ionic.Zip namespace
  • The change is consistently applied across related packages (CreateArchive and ExtractArchive)
  • The changelog explicitly mentions this change was made "because of security reasons"
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the ProDotNetZip package information and potential security issues

# Check if ProDotNetZip is a legitimate package and get its details
curl -s "https://api.nuget.org/v3/registration5-semver1/prodotnetzip/index.json" | jq -r '.items[0].items[0].catalogEntry | {description, authors, projectUrl, tags}'

# Check if there's a newer version available
curl -s "https://api.nuget.org/v3/registration5-semver1/prodotnetzip/index.json" | jq -r '.items[0].upper'

# Search for any security advisories
gh api graphql -f query='
{
  securityVulnerabilities(first: 5, ecosystem: NUGET, package: "ProDotNetZip") {
    nodes {
      advisory {
        summary
        severity
        publishedAt
      }
      vulnerableVersionRange
      firstPatchedVersion {
        identifier
      }
    }
  }
}'

# Check for any breaking changes by looking for API changes in the codebase
rg -A 5 "DotNetZip" 

Length of output: 3371


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the API usage in both packages to verify compatibility
rg -B 2 -A 2 "Ionic\.Zip" .

# Look for any test files that might show usage patterns
fd -e cs -e fs test

Length of output: 2633

Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1)

3-5: LGTM! Changelog entry follows proper format.

The changelog entry follows the Keep a Changelog format and clearly states the change made.

@MatteoDelOmbra MatteoDelOmbra requested a review from jefim December 31, 2024 08:07
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1)

6-6: Fix typo in "deprecated"

There's a typo in the word "depracated" which should be "deprecated".

-- DotNetZip has a HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability (CVE reported Nov 2024) affecting versions 1.10.1 through 1.16.0 with no patch available (package is depracated)
++ DotNetZip has a HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability (CVE reported Nov 2024) affecting versions 1.10.1 through 1.16.0 with no patch available (package is deprecated)
Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj (1)

15-15: Consider using a more specific package URL

While the generic Frends URL is valid, consider using a more specific URL pointing to this package's documentation or repository section for better discoverability.

-		<PackageProjectUrl>https://frends.com/</PackageProjectUrl>
+		<PackageProjectUrl>https://github.com/FrendsPlatform/Frends.ZIP/tree/main/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive</PackageProjectUrl>
Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1)

6-6: Fix typo in "deprecated"

There's a typo in the word "depracated".

-- DotNetZip has a HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability (CVE reported Nov 2024) affecting versions 1.10.1 through 1.16.0 with no patch available (package is depracated)
++ DotNetZip has a HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability (CVE reported Nov 2024) affecting versions 1.10.1 through 1.16.0 with no patch available (package is deprecated)
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4a3a215 and 77f97ac.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj (2 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1 hunks)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj (2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive.csproj
🔇 Additional comments (4)
Frends.Zip.ExtractArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1)

3-8: LGTM! Comprehensive changelog entry with security context.

The changelog entry effectively documents the migration to ProDotNetZip with clear security rationale and version details.

Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.csproj (2)

13-13: Version bump to 1.2.0 is appropriate

The version increment is justified given the security-driven migration to a different ZIP library.


26-26: Verify ProDotNetZip migration impact

The switch from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip is a good security measure. However, let's verify:

  1. API compatibility between the libraries
  2. Impact on existing functionality
  3. Latest stable version availability

Consider adding migration notes to the changelog and documentation to help users understand the impact of this change.

✅ Verification successful

Let me gather more information about the actual usage to verify the compatibility.


Migration to ProDotNetZip is safe and compatible

The verification shows that the migration from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip is safe because:

  1. ProDotNetZip is a maintained fork of DotNetZip that maintains API compatibility
  2. The codebase uses standard DotNetZip APIs (ZipFile, Ionic.Zip namespace) which are preserved in ProDotNetZip
  3. The changelog confirms this is a security-driven change to address a HIGH severity directory traversal vulnerability (CVE from Nov 2024)
  4. All core functionality is covered by comprehensive unit tests that verify:
    • Basic zip operations
    • Password protection
    • File flattening
    • Duplicate handling
    • Recursive operations

The migration requires no code changes as ProDotNetZip maintains full API compatibility with DotNetZip.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check for usage of DotNetZip-specific APIs that might need updates
rg -l "using\s+Ionic\.Zip" 

# Look for ZIP-related operations that might need verification
ast-grep --pattern 'new ZipFile($$$)' 

# Check for any remaining DotNetZip references
rg -l "DotNetZip"

# Look for test files to ensure test coverage
fd -e cs -e fs test

Length of output: 1020


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual implementation in CreateArchive.cs
cat Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CreateArchive.cs

# Check the unit tests to understand usage patterns
cat Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/Frends.Zip.CreateArchive.Tests/UnitTests.cs

# Check changelog for migration notes
cat Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md

Length of output: 19586

Frends.Zip.CreateArchive/CHANGELOG.md (1)

5-7: Enhance security documentation

While the security concern is well documented, consider adding:

  1. The specific CVE identifier for better tracking
  2. A link to the security advisory
  3. A brief migration guide for users updating from DotNetZip to ProDotNetZip

This additional information would help users understand the impact and transition process better.

Let me check if the CVE details are publicly available:

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

All ZIP tasks - move to System.IO.Compression
2 participants