Skip to content

[Snyk] Fix for 4 vulnerabilities#149

Open
tirthbodawala wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
snyk-fix-08dabeebc027ba6e0dab645a568219ba
Open

[Snyk] Fix for 4 vulnerabilities#149
tirthbodawala wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
snyk-fix-08dabeebc027ba6e0dab645a568219ba

Conversation

@tirthbodawala

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

snyk-top-banner

Snyk has created this PR to fix 4 vulnerabilities in the npm dependencies of this project.

Snyk changed the following file(s):

  • package.json
  • package-lock.json

Vulnerabilities that will be fixed with an upgrade:

Issue Score
high severity Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)
SNYK-JS-AJV-15274295
  803  
medium severity Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
SNYK-JS-QS-15268416
  708  
low severity Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF)
SNYK-JS-WEBPACK-15235959
  498  
low severity Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF)
SNYK-JS-WEBPACK-15235969
  498  

Important

  • Check the changes in this PR to ensure they won't cause issues with your project.
  • Max score is 1000. Note that the real score may have changed since the PR was raised.
  • This PR was automatically created by Snyk using the credentials of a real user.

Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open fix PRs.

For more information:
🧐 View latest project report
📜 Customise PR templates
🛠 Adjust project settings
📚 Read about Snyk's upgrade logic


Learn how to fix vulnerabilities with free interactive lessons:

🦉 Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS)
🦉 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling
🦉 Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF)

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 081bb0b1cd

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread package.json
"css-loader": "6.7.1",
"dotenv": "16.0.1",
"eslint": "8.18.0",
"eslint": "10.0.0",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Keep ESLint compatible with declared Node support

Upgrading to eslint 10.0.0 drops support for the runtime this package declares ("node": ">=12.0" in package.json), because the resolved package now requires ^20.19.0 || ^22.13.0 || >=24 (package-lock.json node_modules/eslint engines). In Node 12/14/16/18 environments, lint/install workflows will break or become unsupported after this change, so this is a compatibility regression introduced by the bump.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment thread package.json
"autoprefixer": "10.4.7",
"babel-jest": "28.1.1",
"babel-loader": "8.2.5",
"babel-loader": "10.0.0",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Avoid Babel loader upgrade that drops Node 12/14/16

Bumping babel-loader to 10.0.0 also raises the minimum Node version beyond the project’s stated support range: the resolved package requires ^18.20.0 || ^20.10.0 || >=22.0.0 (package-lock.json node_modules/babel-loader engines), whereas this repo still advertises Node >=12. That means builds using webpack/babel on Node 12/14/16/18 are no longer supported by this dependency set.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants