Files
Open_Ultra_SAST/tests
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 d651455d23 fix(model-grounded-detection): closure scoping, and the three bugs it uncovered
The group-4 finding: JavaScript is callback-heavy, so the method containing a
sink routinely is not the labeled function. `fs.readFileSync` inside the
callback passed to `fs.stat` has enclosing method `<lambda>0`, and filtering on
`sinkMethod == function` dropped it -- the whole path family measured 0/8.

Scope is now decided by line-range containment within the same file
(astParentFullName is empty for lambdas, so nesting is not readable there), and
reported as `inLabeledScope`; the Python side trusts that flag and keeps the
name comparison only as a fallback, so an engine that cannot report scope never
has its sinks silently treated as scoped. Parameter sources stay bound to the
labeled function's OWN parameters -- a callback's `err`/`stats` are not
attacker input.

Fixing the scope exposed three further bugs, each of which would have raised
the number while making the answer untrue:

  * Shortest-flow-wins picked the wrong witness. With closures in scope the
    same sink has flows from `req.url...` (10 steps, the vulnerability), `res`
    (3) and `this` (7). A flow whose source matches the source model now
    outranks a shorter one from a bare captured name; shortest still breaks
    ties, so the order stays total and the verdict deterministic.
  * The JS fact file had NO sanitizers at all, so no JavaScript fix of any
    family could ever be recognised. Added the documented path-normalisation
    and HTML-escaping APIs, with provenance.
  * Adding them regressed the witness, because `resolveUrl` CONTAINS `resolve`
    and the substring test marked the vulnerable flow sanitized. This is the
    same bug class already fixed in dominance.sc and not carried across -- the
    exact fix-the-instance-miss-the-class failure. taint.sc now matches on word
    boundaries too.

And the principled rule the fix turns on: parameter sources are a FALLBACK,
never an override. When a modelled source reaches the sink, those flows are the
evidence; otherwise a captured `res` reaching a sanitized sink reports the fix
as still vulnerable on a flow that names no attacker input.

Also recorded: req.url was NOT wrong as a diagnosis, it was untestable in
isolation -- the scoping bug masked it. Both were needed. On the pair that
motivated all of this:

  vuln   model_entailed      req.url.split('?')[0] -> readFileSync(possibleFilename)
  fixed  model_corroborated  same flow, sanitized by path.normalize
  distinguished: true

700 passing, mypy/ruff clean, gates byte-identical.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-08 16:24:23 +02:00
..