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

socket.io-parser version update #14292

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Mar 2, 2023
Merged

Conversation

andre4i
Copy link
Contributor

@andre4i andre4i commented Feb 23, 2023

Description

https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-2421

socket.io-parser used across the framework needs to be on at least 4.2.1

@github-actions github-actions bot added area: server Server related issues (routerlicious) base: main PRs targeted against main branch labels Feb 23, 2023
@andre4i
Copy link
Contributor Author

andre4i commented Feb 23, 2023

I think I need your help with this, @tylerbutler. Although I added the override in the package.json file, I can still see the old versions in the lockfile. Not sure if it matters, as the top-level package declaration for the socket.io-parser is not the vulnerable version, but I just want to make sure this is doing what the description wants it to do.

/server/historian/lerna-package-lock.json:

		"@socket.io/redis-emitter": {
			"version": "4.1.1",
			"resolved": "https://registry.npmjs.org/@socket.io/redis-emitter/-/redis-emitter-4.1.1.tgz",
			"integrity": "sha512-N0wfcfcVJvPF1AjIlZ5efxGCz+8uY6qeCwIaRU+QUCNdqvtXQtlC/MtUJQCwVqs1MWP6Bv3TDuZGC04gIj7YuQ==",
			"requires": {
				"debug": "~4.3.1",
				"notepack.io": "~2.1.0",
				"socket.io-parser": "~4.0.4"
			},
			"dependencies": {
				"debug": {
					"version": "4.3.4",
					"resolved": "https://registry.npmjs.org/debug/-/debug-4.3.4.tgz",
					"integrity": "sha512-PRWFHuSU3eDtQJPvnNY7Jcket1j0t5OuOsFzPPzsekD52Zl8qUfFIPEiswXqIvHWGVHOgX+7G/vCNNhehwxfkQ==",
					"requires": {
						"ms": "2.1.2"
					}
				},
				"notepack.io": {
					"version": "2.1.3",
					"resolved": "https://registry.npmjs.org/notepack.io/-/notepack.io-2.1.3.tgz",
					"integrity": "sha512-AgSt+cP5XMooho1Ppn8NB3FFaVWefV+qZoZncYTUSch2GAEwlYLcIIbT5YVkMlFeNHnfwOvc4HDlbvrB5BRxXA=="
				},
				"socket.io-parser": {
					"version": "4.0.5",
					"resolved": "https://registry.npmjs.org/socket.io-parser/-/socket.io-parser-4.0.5.tgz",
					"integrity": "sha512-sNjbT9dX63nqUFIOv95tTVm6elyIU4RvB1m8dOeZt+IgWwcWklFDOdmGcfo3zSiRsnR/3pJkjY5lfoGqEe4Eig==",
					"requires": {
						"@types/component-emitter": "^1.2.10",
						"component-emitter": "~1.3.0",
						"debug": "~4.3.1"
					}
				}
			}

server/historian/package.json:

  "overrides": {
    "awesome-typescript-loader": {
      "socket.io-parser": "^4.2.1"
    }

@tylerbutler
Copy link
Member

server/historian/package.json:

  "overrides": {
    "awesome-typescript-loader": {
      "socket.io-parser": "^4.2.1"
    }

Unfortunately I think overrides are not respected by npm, and historian is still using npm. How urgent is this? I have a historian PR that switches to pnpm (#14294). I hope to get merge it in the next couple of days. If this dep could wait it would be a bit easier. If it's urgent, though, I can help more - just let me know.

@andre4i
Copy link
Contributor Author

andre4i commented Feb 23, 2023

Thanks, @tylerbutler. I think it can wait a couple of days, as it will get into the next minor release, anyway. Tinylicious is in the same boat. Do you have plans to move that one as well?

@andre4i
Copy link
Contributor Author

andre4i commented Feb 24, 2023

Hey @tylerbutler, thanks for migrating historian to pnpm. The override works now. Do you have the same plans for t9s? It's the only one left (the other tool - markdown documenter - appears to be honoring the override in npm).

@tylerbutler
Copy link
Member

Hey @tylerbutler, thanks for migrating historian to pnpm. The override works now. Do you have the same plans for t9s? It's the only one left (the other tool - markdown documenter - appears to be honoring the override in npm).

@andre4i I have a PR in progress converting tinylicious to pnpm: #14356

@andre4i andre4i marked this pull request as ready for review February 28, 2023 22:54
@andre4i andre4i requested review from msfluid-bot and a team as code owners February 28, 2023 22:54
@andre4i
Copy link
Contributor Author

andre4i commented Mar 1, 2023

@tylerbutler can you take a look?

@andre4i andre4i merged commit 830b0ea into microsoft:main Mar 2, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: server Server related issues (routerlicious) base: main PRs targeted against main branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants