Skip to content

[WIP] chore: fix vulnerabilities - #796

Open
sipayRT wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
sp.vulnerabilities
Open

[WIP] chore: fix vulnerabilities#796
sipayRT wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
sp.vulnerabilities

Conversation

@sipayRT

@sipayRT sipayRT commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

💡 Codex Review

"testplane": "^9.0.13",

P1 Badge Pin tools compatible with the configured Node range

The checked .github/workflows/e2e.yml still installs, builds, and runs Testplane under Node 20, .nvmrc is also 20, and the main CI matrix includes Node 18/20/22.6, but this upgrade resolves Testplane 9.0.13 with node >=22; the same change brings in webpack-dev-server requiring >=22.15.0 and commitlint requiring >=22.12.0. Consequently the existing E2E workflow and documented local npm start/commit-hook environment are outside these tools' supported runtime range. Either retain Node-20-compatible releases or update the engine declaration, .nvmrc, and workflows together.


html-reporter/package-lock.json

Lines 24333 to 24335 in 18cae13

"node_modules/spark-md5": {
"version": "3.0.2",
"license": "(WTFPL OR MIT)"

P2 Badge Restore integrity metadata in the lockfile

The regenerated lockfile drops resolved and integrity from almost every registry package entry, including this newly added dependency; the parent lockfile contained committed tarball hashes throughout. This makes npm ci re-resolve package artifacts without checking them against a repository-pinned digest, weakening both reproducibility and protection against a registry serving changed content for an existing version. Regenerate the lockfile without omitting registry resolution metadata.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch from 18cae13 to c475a34 Compare August 7, 2026 14:52

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: c475a344d9

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread package.json
},
"engines": {
"node": ">= 18"
"node": ">= 22.22.0"

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Preserve the supported Node versions

Raising the package engine to Node 22.22 makes installations fail for users with engine-strict on Node 18 or 20, even though those versions were supported immediately before this commit and all production dependencies in this lockfile still support Node 18. It also conflicts with the unchanged CI matrix in .github/workflows/node.js.yml, which runs npm ci and tests on Node 18, 20, and 22.6 and builds/publishes on Node 20, as well as the Node 20 e2e workflow. Retain the prior runtime compatibility by selecting compatible development dependencies, or update the release policy and every affected workflow as an intentional breaking change.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch from c475a34 to df7a4ca Compare August 7, 2026 15:00

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: df7a4ca0e4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".


return runner.run((collection) =>
this._tool.run(collection, {grep, sets, tag, browsers, inspectMode, devtools, replMode, local, requireModules})
this._tool.run(collection, {grep, sets, tag, browsers, inspectMode, replMode, local, requireModules})

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P2 Badge Continue forwarding the devtools run option

When the GUI is invoked with Testplane's --devtools option, cliTool.devtools still reaches this adapter, but the updated call silently drops it, so the selected tests run without the requested DevTools mode. This also regresses Testplane 8 installations, which remain supported by the unchanged testplane: "*" peer range; the prior unit test explicitly verified that this option was forwarded. Keep passing devtools (extra run options are harmless to versions that do not use them), or narrow the supported Testplane range and reject the obsolete CLI option explicitly.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@sipayRT sipayRT changed the title chore: fix vulnerabilities [WIP] chore: fix vulnerabilities Aug 7, 2026
@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch from 7637600 to 73d0003 Compare August 7, 2026 15:42
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ Component tests succeed

Report

@pkg-pr-new

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Open in StackBlitz

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/html-reporter@796

commit: 48f942c

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Aug 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

✅ E2E tests succeed

Report

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch 2 times, most recently from faaa69b to 7a4c930 Compare August 10, 2026 12:08

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7a4c93079e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

strategy:
matrix:
node-version: [18.x, 20.x, 22.6] # https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/54532
node-version: [20.x, 22.x, 24.x]

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Build and publish with a supported Node version

The fresh evidence in the current tree is that this matrix was updated but still retains 20.x, while the same change declares Node >=22.22.0 and locks react-router@8.3.0, which has that same minimum; moreover, the Build and Publish steps at lines 31–36 run exclusively for this unsupported Node 20 job. The unchanged e2e workflow also installs and builds on Node 20, so CI continues exercising the upgraded toolchain outside its supported runtime; move these build/publish conditions and the e2e job to at least Node 22.22.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch 3 times, most recently from 8168a67 to cadc71e Compare August 11, 2026 12:01
@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

💡 Codex Review

"react-dom": "^19.2.8",

P2 Badge Preserve the legacy ReactDOM plugin surface

Custom plugins may request the explicitly whitelisted react-dom dependency in lib/static/modules/load-plugin.js, but upgrading it to ReactDOM 19 removes legacy exports such as render, hydrate, and findDOMNode. Any existing plugin using those APIs will therefore receive undefined and fail during initialization or rendering; retain ReactDOM 18 compatibility or provide a compatibility adapter before making this major upgrade.


"lockfileVersion": 3,

P2 Badge Restore integrity metadata in the regenerated lockfile

The lockfile-v3 regeneration drops checksum metadata from nearly every registry package: the previous lock contained 5,498 integrity entries, while this one contains only 162 (for example, the new Axios entry records only its version and dependencies). Consequently, npm ci can no longer verify the downloaded tarballs for most of the dependency graph, weakening the supply-chain protection expected from the lockfile; regenerate it with normal resolved and integrity metadata preserved.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch 2 times, most recently from edaf92f to 4fc0544 Compare August 12, 2026 15:27

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 4fc05440a4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

}

const ANY_IMAGE_ENDING_REGEXP = new RegExp(Object.values(ImageTitleEnding).map(ending => `${ending}$`).join('|'));
const SCREENSHOT_COMPARISON_ERROR_REGEXP = /Screenshot comparison failed|expect\(.*\)\.toHaveScreenshot\(expected\) failed$/;

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P2 Badge Match multiline Playwright screenshot errors

When Playwright appends comparison diagnostics or a call log after expect(...).toHaveScreenshot(expected) failed, the end-of-string anchor prevents this new alternative from matching, so genuine screenshot mismatches retain a generic error name instead of IMAGE_DIFF. The added test only covers a single-line message; match the failure header without requiring it to end the complete message.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch from 4fc0544 to eac33c2 Compare August 12, 2026 16:16

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: eac33c2940

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread package.json
"react-checkbox-tree": "^2.0.2",
"react-clipboard.js": "^1.1.2",
"react-dom": "^18.3.1",
"react-dom": "^19.2.8",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Preserve the React DOM API exposed to plugins

Plugins that import the reporter-provided react-dom can still receive it through lib/static/modules/load-plugin.js:23-27, but this upgrade changes that public module from React DOM 18 to 19, where legacy exports such as render, hydrate, and findDOMNode were removed. Existing UI plugins compiled against the currently exposed API will therefore fail when those calls execute; keep the plugin-facing React DOM version compatible or provide a compatibility layer before upgrading the injected module.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch 3 times, most recently from 48f942c to e034c9b Compare August 14, 2026 10:04
@sipayRT
sipayRT force-pushed the sp.vulnerabilities branch from e034c9b to 315d4d0 Compare August 14, 2026 10:18
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