Skip to content

[Snyk] Security upgrade alpine from 3.16 to 3.19.6 #306

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

cruizen
Copy link
Contributor

@cruizen cruizen commented Feb 12, 2025

snyk-top-banner

Snyk has created this PR to fix 1 vulnerabilities in the dockerfile dependencies of this project.

Keeping your Docker base image up-to-date means you’ll benefit from security fixes in the latest version of your chosen image.

Snyk changed the following file(s):

  • hostplumber/Dockerfile

We recommend upgrading to alpine:3.19.6, as this image has only 0 known vulnerabilities. To do this, merge this pull request, then verify your application still works as expected.

Vulnerabilities that will be fixed with an upgrade:

Issue Score
medium severity Out-of-bounds Write
SNYK-ALPINE316-BUSYBOX-6913410
  514  
medium severity Out-of-bounds Write
SNYK-ALPINE316-BUSYBOX-6913410
  514  

Important

  • Check the changes in this PR to ensure they won't cause issues with your project.
  • Max score is 1000. Note that the real score may have changed since the PR was raised.
  • This PR was automatically created by Snyk using the credentials of a real user.

Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open fix PRs.

For more information:
🧐 View latest project report
📜 Customise PR templates
🛠 Adjust project settings
📚 Read about Snyk's upgrade logic


Learn how to fix vulnerabilities with free interactive lessons:

🦉 Learn about vulnerability in an interactive lesson of Snyk Learn.

Summary by Bito

PR upgrades Alpine base image from 3.16 to 3.19.6 to address critical security vulnerabilities, particularly focusing on resolving an Out-of-bounds Write vulnerability in BusyBox (SNYK-ALPINE316-BUSYBOX-6913410). The update eliminates known vulnerabilities, enhancing the overall security posture of the application.

Unit tests added: False

Estimated effort to review (1-5, lower is better): 1

Copy link

bito-code-review bot commented Feb 12, 2025

Code Review Agent Run #1b2786

Actionable Suggestions - 1
  • hostplumber/Dockerfile - 1
    • Consider using digest hash for immutability · Line 24-24
Review Details
  • Files reviewed - 1 · Commit Range: 478e1d6..478e1d6
    • hostplumber/Dockerfile
  • Files skipped - 0
  • Tools
    • Golangci-lint (Linter) - ✔︎ Successful
    • Whispers (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful
    • Detect-secrets (Secret Scanner) - ✔︎ Successful

AI Code Review powered by Bito Logo

Copy link

Changelist by Bito

This pull request implements the following key changes.

Key Change Files Impacted
Other Improvements - Security Update - Alpine Base Image

Dockerfile - Upgraded Alpine base image from 3.16 to 3.19.6 to fix security vulnerabilities

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ RUN CGO_ENABLED=0 GOOS=linux GOARCH=amd64 go build -a -o manager main.go
# Use distroless as minimal base image to package the manager binary
# Refer to https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/distroless for more details
#FROM gcr.io/distroless/static:nonroot
FROM alpine:3.16
FROM alpine:3.19.6

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Consider using digest hash for immutability

Consider using a specific digest hash instead of version tag 3.19.6 for the Alpine base image to ensure immutable builds. For example: FROM alpine@sha256:c5c5fda71656f07c8567243afe8f0b83e32c333d31b194033d06faf2b2740117

Code suggestion
Check the AI-generated fix before applying
Suggested change
FROM alpine:3.19.6
FROM alpine@sha256:c5c5fda71656f07c8567243afe8f0b83e32c333d31b194033d06faf2b2740117

Code Review Run #1b2786


Is this a valid issue, or was it incorrectly flagged by the Agent?

  • it was incorrectly flagged

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.

2 participants