Skip to content

🛡️ Sentinel: [CRITICAL] 비-ASCII 입력에 대한 hmac.compare_digest의 unhandled exception (DoS) 취약점 수정#366

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
fix-hmac-non-ascii-dos-5141798325216267797
Open

🛡️ Sentinel: [CRITICAL] 비-ASCII 입력에 대한 hmac.compare_digest의 unhandled exception (DoS) 취약점 수정#366
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
fix-hmac-non-ascii-dos-5141798325216267797

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator
  • 🚨 심각도 (Severity): CRITICAL
  • 💡 취약점 (Vulnerability): HTTP Authorization 헤더에 비-ASCII 문자가 포함될 경우, hmac.compare_digestTypeError를 발생시키며 500 Internal Server Error를 유발합니다. 이는 서버의 정상적인 오류 처리를 우회하여 악의적인 사용자가 손쉽게 서버 장애(DoS)를 유도할 수 있는 보안 취약점입니다.
  • 🎯 영향 (Impact): 악의적인 사용자가 비-ASCII 문자가 포함된 인증 헤더를 지속적으로 전송함으로써 서비스의 가용성을 저해하는 서비스 거부(DoS) 공격을 수행할 수 있습니다.
  • 🔧 해결책 (Fix): hmac.compare_digest 호출 시 입력 문자열을 UTF-8 바이트(encode("utf-8"))로 변환하여 비교하도록 수정하여 TypeError 발생을 방지했습니다.
  • ✅ 검증 (Verification): uv run pytest를 통해 관련된 테스트가 모두 성공적으로 통과함을 확인했습니다.

PR created automatically by Jules for task 5141798325216267797 started by @seonghobae

@google-labs-jules

Copy link
Copy Markdown

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.


For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head b721be4ce498388e1dec16f518d7622ccd2a2761.

  • Head SHA: b721be4ce498388e1dec16f518d7622ccd2a2761

  • Workflow run: 29636881510

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

  • Result: FAIL
  • Test evidence: not proven passing
  • Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
  • Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test: test_auth.py"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test: test_auth.py"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: b721be4ce498388e1dec16f518d7622ccd2a2761
  • Workflow run: 29636881510
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head b721be4ce498388e1dec16f518d7622ccd2a2761.

  • Head SHA: b721be4ce498388e1dec16f518d7622ccd2a2761

  • Workflow run: 29636881510

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

  • Result: FAIL
  • Test evidence: not proven passing
  • Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
  • Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Test: test_auth.py"]
  S2 --> I2["regression suite"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Test: test_auth.py"]
  R2 --> V2["targeted test run"]
Loading

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.

1 participant