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

Update date-and-time #1538

Closed
paimon0715 opened this issue Aug 18, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Update date-and-time #1538

paimon0715 opened this issue Aug 18, 2021 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
api: storage Issues related to the googleapis/nodejs-storage API. priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.

Comments

@paimon0715
Copy link

Subject of the issue

@google-cloud/storage@4.7.0 requires date-and-time@0.13.1, which has a security problem (see: CVE-2020-26289):
@google-cloud/storage@4.7.0 ➔ date-and-time@0.13.1

I do not know if this vulnerability actually affects @google-cloud/storage, but it will show up in security reports about dependencies. Since a large number of developers still use @google-cloud/storage@4.7.0(150,282 downloads per week), is there any posibility that you could release an update version for 4.7.* (ie 4.7.1) that introduces a patched version(>=0.14.2) of date-and-time?

In @google-cloud/storage@4.7.1, maybe you can perform the following update(not crossing major version):
date-and-time ^0.13.0 ➔ ^0.14.2
where date-and-time@0.14.2(>=0.14.2) has fixed the vulnerability CVE-2020-26289.
Thank you for your help.^_^

@product-auto-label product-auto-label bot added the api: storage Issues related to the googleapis/nodejs-storage API. label Aug 18, 2021
@shaffeeullah shaffeeullah added type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns. priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. labels Aug 18, 2021
@shaffeeullah
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for calling this out! I will backport the fix to v4. Just curious, is there a specific reason that you have not upgraded to a more recent version of the library? v4.7.0 is quite outdated at this point. We're always looking for ways to make upgrading easier, so any feedback here would be helpful.

@paimon0715
Copy link
Author

@shaffeeullah, thank you for your feedback and suggestion.

upgraded to a more recent version of the library

I know that it's kind of you to have removed the vulnerability since @google-cloud/storage@5.2.0. But, in fact, a large number of downstream projects cannot easily upgrade @google-cloud/storage from version 4.7.0 to (>=5.2.0):
As you can see, @google-cloud/storage@4.7.0 is introduced into the above projects via the following package dependency paths:
(1)multi-db-orm@1.0.8 ➔ node-firestore-import-export@1.1.0 ➔ firebase-admin@8.13.0 ➔ @google-cloud/storage@4.7.0 ➔ date-and-time@0.13.1
(2)node-paytmpg@2.0.4 ➔ multi-db-orm@1.0.8 ➔ node-firestore-import-export@1.1.0 ➔ firebase-admin@8.13.0 ➔ @google-cloud/storage@4.7.0 ➔ date-and-time@0.13.1
......

The projects such as node-firestore-import-export, which introduced @google-cloud/storage@4.7.0, are not maintained anymore. These unmaintained packages can neither upgrade @google-cloud/storage nor be easily migrated by the large number of affected downstream projects.

Since these inactive projects set a version constaint 4.7.* for @google-cloud/storage on the above vulnerable dependency paths, if @google-cloud/storage removes the vulnerability from 4.7.0 and releases a new patched version @google-cloud/storage@4.7.1, such a vulnerability patch can be automatically propagated into the downstream projects.
Thank you for your contributions again.

@shaffeeullah
Copy link
Contributor

This is fixed in release 4.7.2

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api: storage Issues related to the googleapis/nodejs-storage API. priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants