Limit jitpack use

[snesm]

This PR limits the use of jitpack.io packages to the explicitly included list.

Jitpack risks
Repository content filtering

If you are suggesting a fix for a currently exploitable issue, please disclose the issue to the prime-reportstream team directly outside of GitHub instead of filing a PR, so we may immediately patch the affected systems before a disclosure. See SECURITY.md/Reporting a Vulnerability for more information.

Test Steps:

1. Include steps to test these changes

Changes

• Include a comprehensive list of changes in this PR
• (For web UI changes) Include screenshots/video of changes

Checklist

Testing

• Tested locally?
• Ran ./prime test or ./gradlew testSmoke against local Docker ReportStream container?
• (For Changes to /frontend-react/...) Ran npm run lint:write?
• Added tests?

Process

• Are there licensing issues with any new dependencies introduced?
• Includes a summary of what a code reviewer should test/verify?
• Updated the release notes?
• Database changes are submitted as a separate PR?
• DevOps team has been notified if PR requires ops support?

Linked Issues

• Fixes #issue

To Be Done

Create GitHub issues to track the work remaining, if any

• #issue

Specific Security-related subjects a reviewer should pay specific attention to

• Does this PR introduce new endpoints?
  • new endpoint A
  • new endpoint B
• Does this PR include changes in authentication and/or authorization of existing endpoints?
• Does this change introduce new dependencies that need vetting?
• Does this change require changes to our infrastructure?
• Does logging contain sensitive data?
• Does this PR include or remove any sensitive information itself?

If you answered 'yes' to any of the questions above, conduct a detailed Review that addresses at least:

• What are the potential security threats and mitigations? Please list the STRIDE threats and how they are mitigated
  • Spoofing (faking authenticity)
    • Threat T, which could be achieved by A, is mitigated by M
  • Tampering (influence or sabotage the integrity of information, data, or system)
  • Repudiation (the ability to dispute the origin or originator of an action)
  • Information disclosure (data made available to entities who should not have it)
  • Denial of service (make a resource unavailable)
  • Elevation of Privilege (reduce restrictions that apply or gain privileges one should not have)
• Have you ensured logging does not contain sensitive data?
• Have you received any additional approvals needed for this change?

[github-actions]

Dependency Review

✅ No vulnerabilities or license issues found.

Scanned Manifest Files

[github-actions]

Test Results

1 002 tests  ±0   998 ✔️ ±0   2m 19s ⏱️ -39s
   118 suites ±0       4 💤 ±0 
   118 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit fcb8e7a. ± Comparison against base commit 27c7845.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Integration Test Results

  34 files    34 suites   4m 48s ⏱️
282 tests 282 ✔️ 0 💤 0 ❌
283 runs  283 ✔️ 0 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit fcb8e7a.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[jack-h-wang]

Note that the work to remove mock-fuel entirely has been ticketed as #11928.

[snesm]

@mkalish, @victor-chaparro, @arnejduranovic review please

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[mkalish]

👍🏻

[arnejduranovic]

all fuel references are currently being removed from the code, so I would expect this to get removed once that is done. You can find more info in this ticket: #11928