rustsec / rustsec/rustsec

Add `affected` field `macros`

Open
#664 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

advisory-db
Dominant language
Rust
Stars
2k
Forks
198
Avg merge
2d 6h
Merged PRs (30d)
8

Description

So macros can be unsound

e.g. cell-project - gathering ones we need to adjust from functions = {} in case we support macros in the future:
https://github.com/rustsec/advisory-db/pull/1391

Currently we are just putting these into functions = {}

Should there be some more generic'y like paths = {} that can be used more creatively and which we could standardise

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reviewing the issue's current use of functions = {} for affected macros and the linked rustsec/advisory-db pull request 1391. Determine whether macros need a distinct affected field or a generic paths = {} representation. Done means the project has an agreed, standardized way to express affected macros.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
rust
Domain
security
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.