Random errors for XML files: Syntax error at line file.xml:1:\n `?` was unexpected"

[antnks]

Error in mobsfscan 0.2.2 output:

{"code":3,"level":"warn","message":"Syntax error at line file.xml:1:\n `?` was unexpected" ...snip...

The file looks like this:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
...snip...

Which looks like a valid XML

Also another error:

{"code":3,"level":"warn","message":"Syntax error at line styles.xml:1:\n `\u003c?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\"?\u003e\n\u003cresources\u003e...snip...

That files is also a valid XML

[ajinabraham]

Thanks for reporting. Can you share a test file so that I can reproduce this issue at my end?

[tosiara]

You can use any xml file, like this (rename to xml): AndroidManifest.xml.txt

But keep in mind that the issue is random, sometimes it passes and outputs No issues found., and sometimes it generates syntax error. I think it fails to detect the file type and maybe treats it as kotlin?

[tosiara]

Yeah, you can reproduce if you give the file .java extension:

"errors": [
    {
      "code": 3,
      "level": "warn",
      "message": "Syntax error at line AndroidManifest.xml.java:1:\n `<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\"?>\n<test>aaaaaaaaa</test>` was unexpected",
      "path": "AndroidManifest.xml.java",
      "spans": [
        {
          "end": {
            "col": 62,
            "line": 1
          },
          "file": "AndroidManifest.xml.java",
          "start": {
            "col": 1,
            "line": 1
          }
        }
      ],
      "type": "Syntax error"
    }
  ],

[antnks]

Hi, yes, it is random.

I have updated my docker to the latest mobsfscan and bumped all the dependencies, so far haven't see the issue. But need to wait a little until it reproduces.

Attaching the smallest file that triggered the issue last time:

include_feature.zip

[antnks]

If you need to add some debugging code or anything, please ping me in this thread I will be happy to help

[ajinabraham]

@tosiara This expected. It's an invalid java file.

@antnks I cannot reproduce this issue. We need a reproducible test case to debug this further.