Skip to content

Conversation

@nalves599
Copy link
Contributor

When parsing the /proc/<id>/status file some fields are empty which made the dict() conversion fail because the list length was 1.

With this change, we are splitting on the ":" character and striping the key and the value so we can get the key without the ":" at the end and the value without any "\t" at the beginning or "\n" at the end.

When parsing the `/proc/<id>/status` file some field are empty
which made the dict() conversion fail because the list length was 1.

With this change, we are spliting on the ":" character and striping
the key and the value so we can get the key without the ":" at the end and
the value without any "\t" at the beginning or "\n" at the end.
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @nalves599, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a parsing vulnerability in the Linux analyzer component when reading /proc/<id>/status files. Previously, empty fields could cause dictionary conversion errors. The changes introduce a more robust parsing mechanism that correctly extracts and cleans key-value pairs, ensuring the stability and accuracy of process status retrieval.

Highlights

  • Robust /proc/status parsing: The parsing logic for /proc/<id>/status files has been updated to correctly handle cases where fields might be empty, preventing dict() conversion failures.
  • Improved Key-Value Extraction: The method for extracting key-value pairs from status lines now explicitly splits on the first colon (:) and strips leading/trailing whitespace from both the key and the value, ensuring accurate data representation.
  • Corrected State Lookup: The is_alive method now correctly retrieves the process 'State' by using the key 'State' instead of 'State:', aligning with the improved parsing output.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request fixes a parsing issue in get_proc_status when handling empty values in /proc/<pid>/status files. The fix is correct and also updates the key used in is_alive to match the new parsing logic. I've suggested a small improvement to make the parsing more robust against malformed lines.

@doomedraven
Copy link
Collaborator

@dsecuma also this

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