codiumai-pr-agent-free[bot]
commented
8 months ago PR Description updated to latest commit (https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/commit/8b49e80961b007d4b7cc198e6eaa7ac4c6a35934)
Closed YiscahLevySilas1 closed 8 months ago
codiumai-pr-agent-free[bot]
commented
8 months ago PR Description updated to latest commit (https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/commit/8b49e80961b007d4b7cc198e6eaa7ac4c6a35934)
codiumai-pr-agent-free[bot]
commented
8 months ago | ⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5] | 4, because the PR introduces a new security control, Rego policies, and includes multiple test cases. The complexity of Rego policies and the need to understand the security implications require a detailed review. |
| 🧪 Relevant tests | Yes |
| 🔍 Possible issues | The Rego policy might produce false positives if there are legitimate use cases for workloads to have administrative roles, though this seems to be handled by checking for specific conditions. |
| The alert message in `filter.rego` and `raw.rego` uses a static alert score of 9, which might not be appropriate for all contexts. Consider making the alert severity dynamic based on the environment or specific conditions. | |
| The `is_administrative_role` function in `raw.rego` checks for administrative roles based on the presence of wildcards in `apiGroups`, `resources`, and `verbs`. This approach might miss more nuanced administrative permissions that do not use wildcards but still grant extensive privileges. | |
| 🔒 Security concerns | No |
Utilizing extra instructionsThe `review` tool can be configured with extra instructions, which can be used to guide the model to a feedback tailored to the needs of your project. Be specific, clear, and concise in the instructions. With extra instructions, you are the prompter. Specify the relevant sub-tool, and the relevant aspects of the PR that you want to emphasize. Examples for extra instructions: ``` [pr_reviewer] # /review # extra_instructions=""" In the 'possible issues' section, emphasize the following: - Does the code logic cover relevant edge cases? - Is the code logic clear and easy to understand? - Is the code logic efficient? ... """ ``` Use triple quotes to write multi-line instructions. Use bullet points to make the instructions more readable. |
How to enable\disable automation- When you first install PR-Agent app, the [default mode](https://github.com/Codium-ai/pr-agent/blob/main/Usage.md#github-app-automatic-tools) for the `review` tool is: ``` pr_commands = ["/review", ...] ``` meaning the `review` tool will run automatically on every PR, with the default configuration. Edit this field to enable/disable the tool, or to change the used configurations |
Auto-labelsThe `review` tool can auto-generate two specific types of labels for a PR: - a `possible security issue` label, that detects possible [security issues](https://github.com/Codium-ai/pr-agent/blob/tr/user_description/pr_agent/settings/pr_reviewer_prompts.toml#L136) (`enable_review_labels_security` flag) - a `Review effort [1-5]: x` label, where x is the estimated effort to review the PR (`enable_review_labels_effort` flag) |
Extra sub-toolsThe `review` tool provides a collection of possible feedbacks about a PR. It is recommended to review the [possible options](https://github.com/Codium-ai/pr-agent/blob/main/docs/REVIEW.md#enabledisable-features), and choose the ones relevant for your use case. Some of the feature that are disabled by default are quite useful, and should be considered for enabling. For example: `require_score_review`, `require_soc2_ticket`, and more. |
Auto-approve PRsBy invoking: ``` /review auto_approve ``` The tool will automatically approve the PR, and add a comment with the approval. To ensure safety, the auto-approval feature is disabled by default. To enable auto-approval, you need to actively set in a pre-defined configuration file the following: ``` [pr_reviewer] enable_auto_approval = true ``` (this specific flag cannot be set with a command line argument, only in the configuration file, committed to the repository) You can also enable auto-approval only if the PR meets certain requirements, such as that the `estimated_review_effort` is equal or below a certain threshold, by adjusting the flag: ``` [pr_reviewer] maximal_review_effort = 5 ``` |
More PR-Agent commands> To invoke the PR-Agent, add a comment using one of the following commands: > - **/review**: Request a review of your Pull Request. > - **/describe**: Update the PR title and description based on the contents of the PR. > - **/improve [--extended]**: Suggest code improvements. Extended mode provides a higher quality feedback. > - **/ask \ |
codiumai-pr-agent-free[bot]
commented
8 months ago | Category | Suggestions |
| Maintainability |
Consolidate multiple function definitions into a single function using
___
**Consider consolidating the |
Extract logic into a function for better maintainability.___ **To enhance code maintainability, consider extracting the logic for checking if a serviceaccount has administrative roles into a separate function.** [rules/workload-with-administrative-roles/raw.rego [18-28]](https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/pull/595/files#diff-85697fc9e85206d6cfc91c13e7863b76b2bd5c3af6aaad1c6513ac11e241d26bR18-R28) ```diff +has_administrative_roles(sa) { + role := input[_] + role.kind in ["Role", "ClusterRole"] + is_administrative_role(role) + ... +} +... # check if sa has administrative roles -role := input[_] -role.kind in ["Role", "ClusterRole"] -is_administrative_role(role) -... +has_administrative_roles(sa) ``` | |
| Readability |
Use more descriptive variable names for clarity.___ **To improve code readability and maintainability, consider using a more descriptivevariable name than msga for the deny message structure.**
[rules/workload-with-administrative-roles/raw.rego [5-51]](https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/pull/595/files#diff-85697fc9e85206d6cfc91c13e7863b76b2bd5c3af6aaad1c6513ac11e241d26bR5-R51)
```diff
-deny[msga] {
+deny[denyMessage] {
...
- msga := {
+ denyMessage := {
"alertMessage": sprintf("%v: %v in the following namespace: %v has administrative roles", [wl.kind, wl.metadata.name, wl.metadata.namespace]),
...
}
}
```
|
Use descriptive variable names for better readability.___ **Use a more descriptive variable name than `wl` for workloads to improve code readability.** [rules/workload-with-administrative-roles/raw.rego [6-8]](https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/pull/595/files#diff-85697fc9e85206d6cfc91c13e7863b76b2bd5c3af6aaad1c6513ac11e241d26bR6-R8) ```diff -wl := input[_] -start_of_path := get_start_of_path(wl) -wl_spec := object.get(wl, start_of_path, []) +workload := input[_] +start_of_path := get_start_of_path(workload) +workload_spec := object.get(workload, start_of_path, []) ... ``` | |
| Best practice |
Replace magic numbers with named constants for clarity and maintainability.___ **Avoid using magic numbers directly in the code. Define a constant for the alert scorevalue to improve code readability and maintainability.** [rules/workload-with-administrative-roles/raw.rego [36]](https://github.com/kubescape/regolibrary/pull/595/files#diff-85697fc9e85206d6cfc91c13e7863b76b2bd5c3af6aaad1c6513ac11e241d26bR36-R36) ```diff -"alertScore": 9, +const alertScore = 9 +... +"alertScore": alertScore, ``` |
Enabling\disabling automationWhen you first install the app, the [default mode](https://github.com/Codium-ai/pr-agent/blob/main/Usage.md#github-app-automatic-tools) for the improve tool is: ``` pr_commands = ["/improve --pr_code_suggestions.summarize=true", ...] ``` meaning the `improve` tool will run automatically on every PR, with summarization enabled. Delete this line to disable the tool from running automatically. |
Utilizing extra instructionsExtra instructions are very important for the `improve` tool, since they enable to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project. Be specific, clear, and concise in the instructions. With extra instructions, you are the prompter. Specify relevant aspects that you want the model to focus on. Examples for extra instructions: ``` [pr_code_suggestions] # /improve # extra_instructions=""" Emphasize the following aspects: - Does the code logic cover relevant edge cases? - Is the code logic clear and easy to understand? - Is the code logic efficient? ... """ ``` Use triple quotes to write multi-line instructions. Use bullet points to make the instructions more readable. |
A note on code suggestions quality- While the current AI for code is getting better and better (GPT-4), it's not flawless. Not all the suggestions will be perfect, and a user should not accept all of them automatically. - Suggestions are not meant to be simplistic. Instead, they aim to give deep feedback and raise questions, ideas and thoughts to the user, who can then use his judgment, experience, and understanding of the code base. - Recommended to use the 'extra_instructions' field to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project, or use the [custom suggestions :gem:](https://github.com/Codium-ai/pr-agent/blob/main/docs/CUSTOM_SUGGESTIONS.md) tool - With large PRs, best quality will be obtained by using 'improve --extended' mode. |
More PR-Agent commands> To invoke the PR-Agent, add a comment using one of the following commands: > - **/review**: Request a review of your Pull Request. > - **/describe**: Update the PR title and description based on the contents of the PR. > - **/improve [--extended]**: Suggest code improvements. Extended mode provides a higher quality feedback. > - **/ask \ |
github-actions[bot]
commented
8 months ago Summary:
User description
Overview
Type
enhancement, documentation
Description
C-0272) to identify workloads with administrative roles, including detailed description and remediation.filter.regoandraw.rego) for detecting workloads that mount service account tokens by default and have administrative roles.rule.metadata.json) specifying the rule's application scope and language.Changes walkthrough
C-0272-workloadwithadministrativeroles.json
New Control Definition for Workloads with Administrative Rolescontrols/C-0272-workloadwithadministrativeroles.json
administrative roles.
filter.rego
Rego Policy for Identifying Workloads Mounting Service Account Tokensrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/filter.rego
tokens by default.
workload kind.
raw.rego
Detailed Rego Policy for Workloads with Administrative Rolesrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/raw.rego
roles.
bindings.
rule.metadata.json
Metadata for New Rule on Workloads with Administrative Rolesrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/rule.metadata.json
criteria.
expected.json
Failing Test Case Expected Output for Administrative Role Assignmentrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/test/fail-wl-creates-pod/expected.json
with administrative roles.
expected.json
Passing Test Case Expected Output for Limited Permissionsrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/test/pass-wl-limited-permissions/expected.json - Expected output for a passing test case with limited permissions.
expected.json
Passing Test Case Expected Output for Not Mounting Service AccountTokenrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/test/pass-wl-not-mount-sa-token/expected.json
mount a service account token.
expected.json
Passing Test Case Expected Output for Role Bindingrules/workload-with-administrative-roles/test/pass-wl-rolebinding/expected.json - Expected output for a passing test case with a role binding.