Support syft

[Daniel-GrunbergerCA]

PR Type:

Enhancement

---

PR Description:

This PR introduces support for handling Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs) in Syft format. The changes are as follows:

• Replaces the types of SPDX SBOMs with Syft ones in the watcher.
• Updates the watcher tests to reflect these changes.
• Fixes dependencies to the latest Storage version.

---

PR Main Files Walkthrough:

files:

• watcher/watcher_test.go: Replaced SPDX SBOMs with Syft SBOMs in the test cases. Updated the expected SBOM names in the tests.
• watcher/watcher.go: Replaced SPDX SBOMs with Syft SBOMs in the SBOM event handlers. Updated the SBOM watcher to handle Syft SBOMs.
• go.sum: Updated the project dependencies.
• go.mod: Updated the project dependencies.

---

User Description:

This PR introduces support for watching sboms and filteredsboms on syft format. It replaces the types of spdx sboms with syft ones.

[codiumai-pr-agent]

PR Analysis

• 🎯 Main theme: The PR introduces support for handling Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs) in Syft format, replacing the types of SPDX SBOMs with Syft ones in the watcher and updating the watcher tests to reflect these changes.
• 📝 PR summary: This PR is an enhancement that aims to support the Syft format for Software Bill of Materials (SBOMs). It involves changes in the watcher and its tests, replacing SPDX SBOMs with Syft SBOMs. The PR also updates the project dependencies to the latest Storage version.
• 📌 Type of PR: Enhancement
• 🧪 Relevant tests added: Yes
• ⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]: 3, because the PR involves changes in the core functionality of the watcher and its tests, which requires a good understanding of the existing codebase and the new Syft format for SBOMs.
• 🔒 Security concerns: No security concerns found

PR Feedback

• 💡 General suggestions: The PR seems to be well-structured and the changes are consistent with the stated goal of supporting the Syft format for SBOMs. It would be beneficial to ensure that the new format is fully compatible with the existing functionality and that all edge cases are covered in the tests.

• 🤖 Code feedback:

  • relevant file: watcher/watcher_test.go
    suggestion: Consider adding more test cases to cover possible edge cases with the new Syft format. This will help ensure that the new functionality works as expected under different scenarios. [medium]
    relevant line: Object: &spdxv1beta1.SBOMSyft{

  • relevant file: watcher/watcher.go
    suggestion: It would be helpful to add error handling for the deletion of SBOMs. This will help identify any issues that may occur during the deletion process. [important]
    relevant line: wh.storageClient.SpdxV1beta1().SBOMSPDXv2p3s(obj.ObjectMeta.Namespace).Delete(context.TODO(), obj.ObjectMeta.Name, v1.DeleteOptions{})

How to use

Instructions

To invoke the PR-Agent, add a comment using one of the following commands:
/review: Request a review of your Pull Request.
/describe: Update the PR title and description based on the contents of the PR.
/improve [--extended]: Suggest code improvements. Extended mode provides a higher quality feedback.
/ask <QUESTION>: Ask a question about the PR.
/update_changelog: Update the changelog based on the PR's contents.
/add_docs: Generate docstring for new components introduced in the PR.
/generate_labels: Generate labels for the PR based on the PR's contents.
see the tools guide for more details.

To edit any configuration parameter from the configuration.toml, add --config_path=new_value.
For example: /review --pr_reviewer.extra_instructions="focus on the file: ..."
To list the possible configuration parameters, add a /config comment.

[github-actions]

Summary:

• License scan: failure
• Credentials scan: success
• Vulnerabilities scan: success
• Unit test: success
• Go linting: failure

[matthyx]

• Go linting: failure

Can you check why?

[Daniel-GrunbergerCA]

• Go linting: failure

Can you check why?

It's because I don't check the error returned:
Error return value of (github.com/kubescape/storage/pkg/generated/clientset/versioned/typed/softwarecomposition/v1beta1.SBOMSPDXv2p3Interface).Delete is not checked (errcheck)

I don't check since it is deleting older spdx sboms, and we can't do anything it there is an error (also I have asked @vladklokun if he thinks we should leave this check)
There is also another place on the code where we didn't check before and I also don't check ..

[dwertent]

@Daniel-GrunbergerCA Are we not using summary objects?

[github-actions]

Summary:

• License scan: failure
• Credentials scan: success
• Vulnerabilities scan: failure
• Unit test: success
• Go linting: failure