🧪 Add comprehensive tests for security_guard.py rules#7
🧪 Add comprehensive tests for security_guard.py rules#7google-labs-jules[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Added comprehensive test coverage for `hooks/security_guard.py`. The new tests use `pytest` and verify the `check_command` function against various bash commands to ensure dangerous operations are correctly identified and safe commands are allowed. The tests cover rules like `pipe_to_shell`, `chmod_777`, `force_push_main`, `install_github_url`, `docker_privileged`, and `rm_rf_dangerous`.
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
🎯 What: Missing test coverage for
hooks/security_guard.py. Createdhooks/test_security_guard.pyto test the regex-based static analysis rules.📊 Coverage: Covered the happy path (safe commands like
ls -la) and multiple error conditions/edge cases including dangerous pipe-to-shell patterns, permissive chmods, force pushes, dangerous Docker runs, and rm -rf.✨ Result: Improved test coverage and reliability of the
security_guard.pyhook, allowing for confident future refactoring and additions.PR created automatically by Jules for task 4748655056094003837 started by @zknpr