Fixes #4341: package.json & package-lock.json not rsynced by default (main). #4344
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 2 commits
February 11, 2021 08:32
siliconmeadow
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
Fixes #4341
package.jsonandpackage-lock.jsonfiles not rsynced by default. Addresses this supply-chain vulnerability: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/researcher-hacks-over-35-tech-firms-in-novel-supply-chain-attack/Sorry I did the 11.x branch instead of main first.
Proposed changes
As mentioned in @danepowell 's comments in #4341, users can opt to do this themselves on their own repos. Once this is in place, new projects would have it available by default.
Alternatives considered
I considered possibly putting a
.htaccessfile in the theme, but @danepowell 's suggestion seemed far more elegant, robust and reliable.Testing steps
I've only verified this on a client's DEV env with a manual
blt deployand worked for our single use case.Merge requirements
Maybe a security hardening label?