mirror of
https://github.com/norandom/OpenUltraSAST.git
synced 2026-10-18 04:29:27 +00:00
Requirements approved, design and tasks generated. 47 criteria, all traced; 13 tasks in 6 groups. The design is deliberately conservative. The model layer joins as ONE STAGE INSIDE MAP, beside the obligations checker it most resembles -- which already takes entry points, produces findings and merges them. Findings are added, never substituted; the pattern and overlay paths keep working; a machine without Joern scans exactly as it does today. Nothing here is allowed to make the tool worse for someone who does not have the engine. Two decisions carry the most weight. One CPG per scan rather than per region: a build is 5-30s on an excerpt and is the dominant cost at repository scale, so per-region builds would make this unusable. And one total budget rather than the enumerator's per-region cap of eight, which is meaningless across thousands of regions; the budget is spent highest-rank-first and whatever it does not reach is counted and reported, never silently truncated. Task 2.2 is a go/no-go and comes before shipping: the first scan of a pinned known-vulnerable checkout is a measurement nobody has taken, and if one CPG per repository proves infeasible the region and budget design changes shape. Better to learn that before groups 3-6 are built on it. Group 5 (corpus) is last on purpose. The binding constraint today is reachability, not corpus size -- 198 of 238 OWASP pairs went unvendored because volume without readability makes every number worse. The task preamble carries the predecessor's two hard-won habits: audit sibling paths in the same commit as any routing or matching change (five bugs shared that shape, each caught by a measurement rather than a check), and run the whole CI list rather than the parts one remembers (CI was red for a session because `ruff check` passing was taken as evidence for `ruff format --check`). Not approved for implementation. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
9.4 KiB
9.4 KiB
Implementation Plan: contributor-scan
Guidance for the implementing agent
- The predecessor's lesson, in one line. Five bugs in
model-grounded-detectionshared one shape: a taint-specific assumption applied to every family, each caught by a measurement rather than a check. Before you finish any change to a routing rule, a matching rule, or a per-family question, grep for its siblings and fix them in the same commit. The most expensive instance cost a 19-minute run that returned an identical number, and only the identity revealed the bug. - Run the whole CI list before pushing, not the parts you remember:
ruff format --check .,ruff check .,mypy src/openultrasast,pytest, the three gates,compileall src tests, andpytest -m semantic. CI was red for most of a session becauseruff checkpassing was taken as evidence thatruff format --checkwould. - The gate baseline is the safety net.
benchmarks/measurements/2026-09-06-gate-baseline.txt. Run all three gates before and after every task. The model layer is additive: if a gate moves, you changed something that was never meant to change. - RED first, one commit per task, selective
git add. - Zero-dependency core. Copy the capability-probe pattern in
semantic/extra.pyandcpg/capability.py. - Do not modify
model/pipeline,taint,dominance,config_value,specsorcandidates. They are built and measured. If a change looks necessary, it belongs in its own commit with its own measurement.
Group 1 — Wire it (gate-protected)
-
1.1 Regions from entry points
model/regions.py:ScanRegion(path, function, families, rank, source)andregions_for(entries, targets, *, taxonomy, language_of). Rank from whatEntryPointRecordalready carries (access_level,trust_boundary) — do not invent a new signal. File-level fallback when a target has no entry point, withsource="file_fallback". Families from region shape and language, via the existingtaint_specs/dominance_specs/config_specs.- Sibling audit (Req 8.5): family routing now exists in three places —
ceiling.py's harness,pipeline._arbitrate, and here. Check all three agree before finishing. - Observable: a region is produced per entry point; a target with no entry point yields a file region marked as such; no region carries a family whose spec is absent for its language.
- Requirements: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 8.5
-
1.2 The repository driver
model/scan.py:ScanBudget,ModelScanResult,scan_repository(...). One CPG per run, reused across regions. Regions in rank order; budget decremented per model call and checked before each; the remainder counted intoregions_unjudged. Findings ordered by rung, then rank.- Observable: one
backend.buildcall for many regions; a budget of N yields at most N model calls and a non-zeroregions_unjudged; ordering putsmodel_entailedabovesuspicion; a failed CPG build yields an empty result withcpg_build_failed, never an exception. - Redaction (Req 8.3) is inherited from
model/pipeline, which redacts every prompt; a test asserts the driver adds no unredacted path of its own. - Requirements: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 8.3
- Depends: 1.1
-
1.3 The MAP stage
- Wire
scan_repositoryintocli.pyinsideStage.MAP, mirroring_check_obligations: takesentry_pointsandtargets, returns findings merged additively beside the pattern, overlay and obligation findings. A[model]config block (enabled, budget, max regions), zero-dep, conservative defaults. Payload into the manifest withby_rung, cost and elapsed. - Observable: a scan on a repo with Joern present reports findings carrying rungs; the same scan with
OPENULTRASAST_JOERN_PROBE=offis identical to today's output plus acpg_unavailabledegradation; the three gates are byte-identical. - The
[model]block is capability-detected like every other optional plane (Req 8.4): core staysdependencies = [], and the engine, endpoint and execution tier each degrade to a recorded reason. - Requirements: 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 8.4
- Depends: 1.2
- Wire
Group 2 — Scale it (the phase that can reshape the rest)
-
2.1 A pinned known-vulnerable checkout
benchmarks/repos/<name>.toml: url, commit, the known CVE, the file and function it lives in, licence. Start with one small enough to iterate on. Fetch is explicit and offline-by-default, like the pointer pairs.- Observable: the recipe resolves to a checkout; CI never fetches it.
- Requirements: 4.1
- Depends: 1.3
-
2.2 The first repository measurement
- Run the full scan against that checkout and commit the artifact: CPG build time, scan wall-clock, peak
memory, findings by rung, cost,
regions_unjudged, and whether the known CVE was found and at which rung. If the repository cannot be processed in its envelope, record the stage it failed at. - This is the go/no-go for the shape of the rest: if one CPG per repository is infeasible, the region and budget design changes and phases 3–6 should not be built on it first.
- Observable: the artifact exists with every field; the reading states go or no-go and why.
- Requirements: 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5
- Depends: 2.1
- Run the full scan against that checkout and commit the artifact: CPG build time, scan wall-clock, peak
memory, findings by rung, cost,
Group 3 — Ship it
-
3.1 Contributor output
model/report.py: a scan summary — counts per rung, the top findings with witness andpath:line, and a plain statement of whatsuspicionmeans (the model could not confirm it). Findings to the writable output only.- Observable: a scan produces a summary readable without opening JSON; every finding shows rung, witness and location; nothing is written into the analysed tree.
- Keeps the disciplines already built into
model/report.py(Req 8.1, 8.2): per-slice rows with the real-world slice deciding, a refused bare aggregate, and the overfitting gap published beside any headline — absent rather than zero when a slice is missing. - Requirements: 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 8.1, 8.2
- Depends: 1.3
-
3.2 Build and verify the image
docker compose build, then run a real scan through it and through the shell wrapper. The Dockerfile and compose exist and are syntax-valid; the image has never been built, so nothing about it is proven.- Observable: the image builds;
TARGET=<repo> docker compose run --rm ousast scan /targetproduces the same findings as a native run; the target mount is read-only; the network is off by default. - Requirements: 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5
- Depends: 3.1
Group 4 — Close the deferred decisions
-
4.1 The memory-family decision
- Either reach
memorythrough an adopted execution tier, or record explicitly that C memory-safety is out of scope. 173 of the 176 real-world CVE pairs sit idle behind a stub; the decision gates Req 9.2. - Observable: the decision and its reason are recorded where a later reader finds them; if out of scope, the corpus says so per slice.
- Requirements: 7.1, 7.3
- Either reach
-
4.2 Retire
evidence_level- It duplicates
rungin intent. Retire it, or record why both are kept. Note the legacy valuestatic_corroborationcomes from the flat-IR overlay, which Req 4.4 of the predecessor demotes to the suspicion band — so a straight rename would overstate it. - Observable: one vocabulary, or a recorded reason for two; SARIF and JSON consumers considered.
- Requirements: 7.2, 7.3
- It duplicates
Group 5 — Grow the corpus
-
5.1 PHP/WordPress slice
- Plugin and core weaknesses.
php2cpgneeds a PHP interpreter, which the image provides. Validate on a sample that the model can read the pairs before vendoring — the OWASP harvest found 238 and vendored 40 for exactly this reason. - Observable: a sample measurement precedes vendoring; only categories the model can arbitrate are vendored; the slice reports as its own row; every pair states a licence.
- Requirements: 9.1, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7
- Depends: 3.2
- Plugin and core weaknesses.
-
5.2 More vibe-code pairs
- The slice where the stated audience works, currently 35 pairs. Same read-check discipline.
- Requirements: 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7
-
5.3 Real-world C library CVEs
- libpng and the image libraries, OpenSSH, libpam, kernel modules. Gated on 4.1: until the memory decision closes these would join 173 idle pairs.
- Requirements: 9.2, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6
- Depends: 4.1
Group 6 — Regression baselines
- 6.1 Repository baseline and delta
- A committed baseline per pinned checkout; a delta report on fact-table or query changes showing findings gained, lost and rung movements. An unexplained loss of a previously-entailed finding is a regression to investigate, not a number to accept. The baseline records the engine version, because a CPG engine change moves every verdict.
- Requirements: 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4
- Depends: 2.2
Task-plan review notes
- Group 1 must land and pass review before group 2: measuring an unwired pipeline is what produced a session's worth of harness-only numbers.
- Task 2.2 is a go/no-go. If one CPG per repository is infeasible, stop and redesign the region/budget model rather than building groups 3–6 on an assumption.
- Group 5 is deliberately last. The corpus is not the binding constraint today — reachability is — and 198 of 238 OWASP pairs were left unvendored precisely because volume without readability makes every number worse.