Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Filter CPE matches by target SW to reduce FPs #390

Closed
wagoodman opened this issue Aug 19, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #810
Closed

Filter CPE matches by target SW to reduce FPs #390

wagoodman opened this issue Aug 19, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #810
Labels
enhancement New feature or request false-positive

Comments

@wagoodman
Copy link
Contributor

If a CPE search results in a match against a CPE that has target SW specified, then check the package type and/or language against the value to see if it has any known incompatibilities (e.g. python package language matching against a vulnerability with a CPE that has a target SW of nodejs is probably wrong, so the match should be filtered out).

It cannot be assumed that target SW is specified; if not specified this filtering should be skipped.

Also, there are some odd permutations that may indeed be valid, for example, a java package wrapping a javascript package. It may be entirely valid for the vulnerability to have a CPE for nodejs even if the package is a java type. This needs to be explored more --is this contrived? or is this case prevalent?

@wagoodman wagoodman added enhancement New feature or request false-positive labels Aug 19, 2021
@westonsteimel
Copy link
Contributor

I think this makes a lot of sense. There is at least an example of that scenario happening at #445 (comment)

I guess you could make it configurable?

@westonsteimel
Copy link
Contributor

Another thing which might potentially be useful (and should probably be configurable on individual ecosystem matcher level) could be if we find an NVD match and that CVE has a GHSA for another ecosystem (and the eocsystem we're matching for is supported by GitHub) we filter it out. Hopefully that makes sense but if not I can try and explain it better.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request false-positive
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants