False Positive on any artifact with an ID or group ID that contains the name of a vulnerable library
See original GitHub issueLooks like something has happened to the library pattern matching recently.
Example:
False positive CVE-2005-2311 on one of our internal library dependencies - reported as cpe:2.3:a:sms:sms:0.1.0:snapshot:*:*:*:*:*:*
<dependency>
<groupId>com.sinch.sms</groupId>
<artifactId>msisdn-validation-management-api</artifactId>
<version>0.1.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
</dependency>
Same thing with another internal library named ha-scheduled-message-grpc, which was reported to contain an old vulnerability in GRPC library from 2017.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:7 (2 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Turns out 78% of reported CVEs on top DockerHub images ...
JFrog Xray's new “Contextual Analysis” feature determines 78% of reported CVEs on top DockerHub images are not exploitable.
Read more >APM 10.7 & 10.8 Security Vulnerabilities that are False Positive
This page lists security vulnerabilities reported by Black Duck/Code Insight/TechStack and other tools against APM 10.7 and 10.8 that are ...
Read more >How we detect vulnerable libraries using OWASP ...
False positives are implied by the heuristics used mainly for detecting CPE identifier. We ca't get rid of all of them, until a...
Read more >Troubleshoot vulnerability detection - Prisma
The above steps should help answer whether the vulnerable package exists in the image or not and answer if a CVE is truly...
Read more >Tutorial on how to process vulnerability scans
False positives, false negatives, and data discrepancies are the main reasons ... vulnerable artifact, which might be one library or module; ...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
@jeremylong What is a good way to write a suppression rule that ignores the warnings related to grpc version, but still will warn about any new OWASP positives for the given package/dependency?
My current attempt after reading the docs/wiki, but really unsure if it works as intended:
@theHilikus That first filename containing grpc indicates it’s the same issue.