Skip to content

🛡️ Sentinel: [HIGH] 업로드 엔드포인트의 리소스 제어 불능(DoS) 취약점 수정#246

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
sentinel-dos-fix-tempdir-3116578629236057975
Open

🛡️ Sentinel: [HIGH] 업로드 엔드포인트의 리소스 제어 불능(DoS) 취약점 수정#246
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
sentinel-dos-fix-tempdir-3116578629236057975

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚨 심각도: HIGH
💡 취약점: 파일 업로드 엔드포인트에서 입력 검증 및 파일 이름 살균 작업을 수행하기 전에 임시 디렉토리를 할당하고 있었습니다.
🎯 영향: 악의적이거나 유효하지 않은 요청이 지속적으로 발생할 경우 디스크 공간과 메모리가 임시로 누수되어 애플리케이션이 리소스 고갈 또는 서비스 거부(DoS) 상태에 빠질 수 있습니다.
🔧 수정: 입력 검증 및 파일 이름 살균 처리 위치를 제어 흐름의 앞단으로 옮겨, 서버 리소스(tempfile.mkdtemp())를 할당하기 전에 업로드를 즉시 검증하도록 변경했습니다. FastAPI의 FileResponseBackgroundTask를 명시적으로 할당하도록 수정하여 올바르게 백그라운드 작업이 수행되도록 처리했습니다.
✅ 검증: 관련 테스트 코드를 성공적으로 실행하여 올바른 동작을 확인했습니다.


PR created automatically by Jules for task 3116578629236057975 started by @seonghobae

Moved input validation and filename sanitization earlier in the control flow, immediately validating uploads *before* allocating server resources (`tempfile.mkdtemp()`).
@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.

@github-advanced-security

Copy link
Copy Markdown

You are seeing this message because GitHub Code Scanning has recently been set up for this repository, or this pull request contains the workflow file for the Code Scanning tool.

What Enabling Code Scanning Means:

  • The 'Security' tab will display more code scanning analysis results (e.g., for the default branch).
  • Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results.
  • You will be able to see the analysis results for the pull request's branch on this overview once the scans have completed and the checks have passed.

For more information about GitHub Code Scanning, check out the documentation.

@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 3360450b8d0bf6d5269a006b9ed7fe79d95ae177.

  • Head SHA: 3360450b8d0bf6d5269a006b9ed7fe79d95ae177

  • Workflow run: 29271702993

  • 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"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: 3360450b8d0bf6d5269a006b9ed7fe79d95ae177
  • Workflow run: 29271702993
  • 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 3360450b8d0bf6d5269a006b9ed7fe79d95ae177.

  • Head SHA: 3360450b8d0bf6d5269a006b9ed7fe79d95ae177

  • Workflow run: 29271702993

  • 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"]
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.

2 participants