Sign upLogin

ComplianceAsCode/content

View on GitHub
Star
build-scripts/verify_references.py

Summary

Maintainability
F
3 days
Test Coverage

Function main has a Cognitive Complexity of 97 (exceeds 7 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

def main():
    global exit_value
    (options, args) = parse_options()
    xccdffilename = args[0]
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py - About 1 day to fix

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

  • Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
  • Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
  • Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"

Further reading

Cyclomatic complexity is too high in function main. (55)
Open

def main():
    global exit_value
    (options, args) = parse_options()
    xccdffilename = args[0]
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by radon

Cyclomatic Complexity

Cyclomatic Complexity corresponds to the number of decisions a block of code contains plus 1. This number (also called McCabe number) is equal to the number of linearly independent paths through the code. This number can be used as a guide when testing conditional logic in blocks.

Radon analyzes the AST tree of a Python program to compute Cyclomatic Complexity. Statements have the following effects on Cyclomatic Complexity:

Construct Effect on CC Reasoning
if +1 An if statement is a single decision.
elif +1 The elif statement adds another decision.
else +0 The else statement does not cause a new decision. The decision is at the if.
for +1 There is a decision at the start of the loop.
while +1 There is a decision at the while statement.
except +1 Each except branch adds a new conditional path of execution.
finally +0 The finally block is unconditionally executed.
with +1 The with statement roughly corresponds to a try/except block (see PEP 343 for details).
assert +1 The assert statement internally roughly equals a conditional statement.
Comprehension +1 A list/set/dict comprehension of generator expression is equivalent to a for loop.
Boolean Operator +1 Every boolean operator (and, or) adds a decision point.

Source: http://radon.readthedocs.org/en/latest/intro.html

Function get_profileruleids has a Cognitive Complexity of 10 (exceeds 7 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

def get_profileruleids(xccdftree, profile_name):
    ruleids = []

    while profile_name:
        profile = None
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py - About 45 mins to fix

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

  • Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
  • Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
  • Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"

Further reading

Function get_ovalfiles has a Cognitive Complexity of 8 (exceeds 7 allowed). Consider refactoring.
Open

def get_ovalfiles(checks):
    global exit_value
    # Iterate over all checks, grab the OVAL files referenced within
    ovalfiles = set()
    for check in checks:
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py - About 25 mins to fix

Cognitive Complexity

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how difficult a unit of code is to intuitively understand. Unlike Cyclomatic Complexity, which determines how difficult your code will be to test, Cognitive Complexity tells you how difficult your code will be to read and comprehend.

A method's cognitive complexity is based on a few simple rules:

  • Code is not considered more complex when it uses shorthand that the language provides for collapsing multiple statements into one
  • Code is considered more complex for each "break in the linear flow of the code"
  • Code is considered more complex when "flow breaking structures are nested"

Further reading

Refactor this function to reduce its Cognitive Complexity from 98 to the 15 allowed.
Open

def main():
Severity: Critical
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by sonar-python

Cognitive Complexity is a measure of how hard the control flow of a function is to understand. Functions with high Cognitive Complexity will be difficult to maintain.

See

Merge this if statement with the enclosing one.
Open

                if (disa_ref_href in ref_href_list) and (rule.get("id") not in profile_ruleids):
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by sonar-python

Merging collapsible if statements increases the code's readability.

Noncompliant Code Example

if condition1:
    if condition2:
        # ...

Compliant Solution

if condition1 and condition2:
    # ...

Merge this if statement with the enclosing one.
Open

                if (nist_ref_href in ref_href_list) and (rule.get("id") not in profile_ruleids):
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by sonar-python

Merging collapsible if statements increases the code's readability.

Noncompliant Code Example

if condition1:
    if condition2:
        # ...

Compliant Solution

if condition1 and condition2:
    # ...

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

            if options.disarefs_not_in_profile:
                if (disa_ref_href in ref_href_list) and (rule.get("id") not in profile_ruleids):
                    print("ERROR: XCCDF Rule found with DISA CCI reference outside Profile %s: "
                           % options.profile_name + rule.get("id"))
                    exit_value = 1
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py and 1 other location - About 3 hrs to fix
build-scripts/verify_references.py on lines 277..281

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 65.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

            if options.nistrefs_not_in_profile:
                if (nist_ref_href in ref_href_list) and (rule.get("id") not in profile_ruleids):
                    print("ERROR: XCCDF Rule found with NIST reference outside Profile %s: "
                           % options.profile_name + rule.get("id"))
                    exit_value = 1
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py and 1 other location - About 3 hrs to fix
build-scripts/verify_references.py on lines 283..287

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 65.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

                if (disa_ref_href not in ref_href_list) and options.rules_without_disarefs:
                    print("ERROR: No valid DISA CCI reference in XCCDF Rule: " +
                          rule.get("id"))
                    exit_value = 1
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py and 1 other location - About 1 hr to fix
build-scripts/verify_references.py on lines 257..260

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 41.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Similar blocks of code found in 2 locations. Consider refactoring.
Open

                if (nist_ref_href not in ref_href_list) and options.rules_without_nistrefs:
                    print("ERROR: No valid NIST reference in XCCDF Rule: " +
                          rule.get("id"))
                    exit_value = 1
Severity: Major
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py and 1 other location - About 1 hr to fix
build-scripts/verify_references.py on lines 262..265

Duplicated Code

Duplicated code can lead to software that is hard to understand and difficult to change. The Don't Repeat Yourself (DRY) principle states:

Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.

When you violate DRY, bugs and maintenance problems are sure to follow. Duplicated code has a tendency to both continue to replicate and also to diverge (leaving bugs as two similar implementations differ in subtle ways).

Tuning

This issue has a mass of 41.

We set useful threshold defaults for the languages we support but you may want to adjust these settings based on your project guidelines.

The threshold configuration represents the minimum mass a code block must have to be analyzed for duplication. The lower the threshold, the more fine-grained the comparison.

If the engine is too easily reporting duplication, try raising the threshold. If you suspect that the engine isn't catching enough duplication, try lowering the threshold. The best setting tends to differ from language to language.

See codeclimate-duplication's documentation for more information about tuning the mass threshold in your .codeclimate.yml.

Refactorings

Further Reading

Line too long (122 > 99 characters)
Open

                      help="print XCCDF Rules which have a DISA CCI reference, but are not part of the Profile specified")
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Limit all lines to a maximum of 79 characters.

There are still many devices around that are limited to 80 character
lines; plus, limiting windows to 80 characters makes it possible to
have several windows side-by-side.  The default wrapping on such
devices looks ugly.  Therefore, please limit all lines to a maximum
of 79 characters. For flowing long blocks of text (docstrings or
comments), limiting the length to 72 characters is recommended.

Reports error E501.

Block comment should start with '# '
Open

                #exit_value = 1
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Separate inline comments by at least two spaces.

An inline comment is a comment on the same line as a statement.
Inline comments should be separated by at least two spaces from the
statement. They should start with a # and a single space.

Each line of a block comment starts with a # and a single space
(unless it is indented text inside the comment).

Okay: x = x + 1  # Increment x
Okay: x = x + 1    # Increment x
Okay: # Block comment
E261: x = x + 1 # Increment x
E262: x = x + 1  #Increment x
E262: x = x + 1  #  Increment x
E265: #Block comment
E266: ### Block comment

Line too long (118 > 99 characters)
Open

                      help="print XCCDF Rules which have a NIST reference, but are not part of the Profile specified")
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Limit all lines to a maximum of 79 characters.

There are still many devices around that are limited to 80 character
lines; plus, limiting windows to 80 characters makes it possible to
have several windows side-by-side.  The default wrapping on such
devices looks ugly.  Therefore, please limit all lines to a maximum
of 79 characters. For flowing long blocks of text (docstrings or
comments), limiting the length to 72 characters is recommended.

Reports error E501.

Line too long (103 > 99 characters)
Open

    ovaldef_ids_extended = [oval_extenddef.get("definition_ref") for oval_extenddef in oval_extenddefs]
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Limit all lines to a maximum of 79 characters.

There are still many devices around that are limited to 80 character
lines; plus, limiting windows to 80 characters makes it possible to
have several windows side-by-side.  The default wrapping on such
devices looks ugly.  Therefore, please limit all lines to a maximum
of 79 characters. For flowing long blocks of text (docstrings or
comments), limiting the length to 72 characters is recommended.

Reports error E501.

Continuation line over-indented for visual indent
Open

                           % options.profile_name + rule.get("id"))
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Continuation lines indentation.

Continuation lines should align wrapped elements either vertically
using Python's implicit line joining inside parentheses, brackets
and braces, or using a hanging indent.

When using a hanging indent these considerations should be applied:
- there should be no arguments on the first line, and
- further indentation should be used to clearly distinguish itself
  as a continuation line.

Okay: a = (\n)
E123: a = (\n    )

Okay: a = (\n    42)
E121: a = (\n   42)
E122: a = (\n42)
E123: a = (\n    42\n    )
E124: a = (24,\n     42\n)
E125: if (\n    b):\n    pass
E126: a = (\n        42)
E127: a = (24,\n      42)
E128: a = (24,\n    42)
E129: if (a or\n    b):\n    pass
E131: a = (\n    42\n 24)

Expected 2 blank lines after class or function definition, found 1
Open

if __name__ == "__main__":
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Separate top-level function and class definitions with two blank lines.

Method definitions inside a class are separated by a single blank
line.

Extra blank lines may be used (sparingly) to separate groups of
related functions.  Blank lines may be omitted between a bunch of
related one-liners (e.g. a set of dummy implementations).

Use blank lines in functions, sparingly, to indicate logical
sections.

Okay: def a():\n    pass\n\n\ndef b():\n    pass
Okay: def a():\n    pass\n\n\nasync def b():\n    pass
Okay: def a():\n    pass\n\n\n# Foo\n# Bar\n\ndef b():\n    pass
Okay: default = 1\nfoo = 1
Okay: classify = 1\nfoo = 1

E301: class Foo:\n    b = 0\n    def bar():\n        pass
E302: def a():\n    pass\n\ndef b(n):\n    pass
E302: def a():\n    pass\n\nasync def b(n):\n    pass
E303: def a():\n    pass\n\n\n\ndef b(n):\n    pass
E303: def a():\n\n\n\n    pass
E304: @decorator\n\ndef a():\n    pass
E305: def a():\n    pass\na()
E306: def a():\n    def b():\n        pass\n    def c():\n        pass

Continuation line over-indented for visual indent
Open

                           % options.profile_name + rule.get("id"))
Severity: Minor
Found in build-scripts/verify_references.py by pep8

Continuation lines indentation.

Continuation lines should align wrapped elements either vertically
using Python's implicit line joining inside parentheses, brackets
and braces, or using a hanging indent.

When using a hanging indent these considerations should be applied:
- there should be no arguments on the first line, and
- further indentation should be used to clearly distinguish itself
  as a continuation line.

Okay: a = (\n)
E123: a = (\n    )

Okay: a = (\n    42)
E121: a = (\n   42)
E122: a = (\n42)
E123: a = (\n    42\n    )
E124: a = (24,\n     42\n)
E125: if (\n    b):\n    pass
E126: a = (\n        42)
E127: a = (24,\n      42)
E128: a = (24,\n    42)
E129: if (a or\n    b):\n    pass
E131: a = (\n    42\n 24)

There are no issues that match your filters.

Category
Status