Skip to content

chore(deps): suppress block-buffer finding in the Tauri lockfile - #3524

Merged
jpgough-ms merged 1 commit into
finos:mainfrom
rocketstack-matt:fix/osv-block-buffer-suppression
Oct 27, 2026
Merged

jpgough-ms merged 1 commit into
finos:mainfrom
rocketstack-matt:fix/osv-block-buffer-suppression

Conversation

@rocketstack-matt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Description

Since 2026-10-27 03:31 UTC, the osv-scanner check fails on every PR. OSV started to normalise crate names in production (google/osv.dev#6237). GHSA-qwgh-2vcv-g2f7 names the crate block_buffer, so it now matches block-buffer@0.10.4 in the Tauri Cargo.lock (CVSS 6.3). The advisory, scanner version and lockfile did not change. The next scan of main will also fail. OSV Fix changes only npm packages, so it cannot fix this finding.

The finding is a false positive. The flaw is in the cursor that block-buffer 0.11.0-pre and later keep inside the buffer block. 0.10.4 keeps the cursor in a separate field, which a caught panic does not change. The advisory range (< 0.12.1) is too wide. An update is not possible: the fix (0.12.1) needs digest 0.11, and tauri-codegen 2.7.4 and wry 0.57.1 still require sha2 ^0.10.

This PR adds the suppression to osv-scanner.toml and a not_affected VEX statement (vulnerable_code_not_present). VEX goes from version 14 to 15. block-buffer is only in Cargo.lock, so the suppression cannot hide another copy.

After this merges, open PRs need Update branch or a new push. A re-run of the check uses the old merge commit, which has the old osv-scanner.toml.

Not in this PR: a request to GitHub to correct the advisory range to >= 0.11.0-pre, < 0.12.1. When OSV has the correct range, the suppression can be removed.

Type of Change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • 📚 Documentation update
  • 🎨 Code style/formatting changes
  • ♻️ Refactoring (no functional changes)
  • ⚡ Performance improvements
  • ✅ Test additions or updates
  • 🔧 Chore (maintenance, dependencies, CI, etc.)

Affected Components

  • CLI (cli/)
  • Schema (calm/)
  • CALM AI (calm-ai/)
  • CALM Hub (calm-hub/)
  • CALM Hub UI (calm-hub-ui/)
  • CALM Lab (calm-lab/)
  • CALM Models (calm-models/)
  • CALM Server (calm-server/)
  • CALM Studio (calm-studio/)
  • CALM Widgets (calm-widgets/)
  • CALMGuard (calm-guard/)
  • Documentation (docs/)
  • Shared (shared/)
  • VS Code Extension (calm-plugins/vscode/)
  • Dependencies
  • CI/CD

Commit Message Format ✅

chore(deps): suppress block-buffer finding in the Tauri lockfile

Testing

  • I have tested my changes locally

  • I have added/updated unit tests

  • All existing tests pass

  • osv-scanner v2.6.0 with the CI flags and all four lockfiles: with the main config, 1 finding at or above CVSS 5 (this one). With this branch, 0. The other 6 findings are the known Cargo findings below the threshold.

  • I compared the source of block-buffer 0.10.4, 0.11.0-pre and 0.12.1 to confirm where each version keeps the cursor.

  • No code changed, so the test suites were not run.

Checklist

  • My commits follow the conventional commit format
  • I have updated documentation if necessary
  • I have added tests for my changes (if applicable)
  • My changes follow the project's coding standards

OSV now normalises crate names, so GHSA-qwgh-2vcv-g2f7 (filed as
block_buffer) matches block-buffer 0.10.4 and fails every scan. The flaw
is in the inline cursor that 0.11.0-pre added. Version 0.10 keeps the
cursor in a separate field, so the advisory range is too wide. No Tauri
release moves to sha2 0.11, so suppress the finding with a VEX statement.
@rocketstack-matt
rocketstack-matt requested a review from a team as a code owner October 27, 2026 07:52
@jpgough-ms
jpgough-ms merged commit 4184159 into finos:main Oct 27, 2026
22 checks passed
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