Possible SQL injection Open
AND leads.project_id = #{project_id}- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Injection is #1 on the 2013 OWASP Top Ten web security risks. SQL injection is when a user is able to manipulate a value which is used unsafely inside a SQL query. This can lead to data leaks, data loss, elevation of privilege, and other unpleasant outcomes.
Brakeman focuses on ActiveRecord methods dealing with building SQL statements.
A basic (Rails 2.x) example looks like this:
User.first(:conditions => "username = '#{params[:username]}'")Brakeman would produce a warning like this:
Possible SQL injection near line 30: User.first(:conditions => ("username = '#{params[:username]}'"))The safe way to do this query is to use a parameterized query:
User.first(:conditions => ["username = ?", params[:username]])Brakeman also understands the new Rails 3.x way of doing things (and local variables and concatenation):
username = params[:user][:name].downcase
password = params[:user][:password]
User.first.where("username = '" + username + "' AND password = '" + password + "'")This results in this kind of warning:
Possible SQL injection near line 37:
User.first.where((((("username = '" + params[:user][:name].downcase) + "' AND password = '") + params[:user][:password]) + "'"))See the Ruby Security Guide for more information and Rails-SQLi.org for many examples of SQL injection in Rails.
Method insert_couplet has a Cognitive Complexity of 16 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def insert_couplet
c,d = nil, nil
p = node_position
- Read upRead up
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
Method has too many lines. [28/25] Open
def destroy_couplet
k = children.order(:position).reload.to_a
return true if k.empty?
# TODO: handle multiple facets- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
Method has too many lines. [28/25] Open
def self.roots_with_data(project_id, load_root_otus = false)
# The updated_at subquery computes key_updated_at (and others), the second
# query uses that to compute key_updated_by (by finding which node has the
# corresponding key_updated_at).
# TODO: couplet_count will be wrong if any couplets don't have exactly two- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks if the length of a method exceeds some maximum value. Comment lines can optionally be ignored. The maximum allowed length is configurable.
Method destroy_couplet has a Cognitive Complexity of 15 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def destroy_couplet
k = children.order(:position).reload.to_a
return true if k.empty?
# TODO: handle multiple facets- Read upRead up
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
Method roots_with_data has 28 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def self.roots_with_data(project_id, load_root_otus = false)
# The updated_at subquery computes key_updated_at (and others), the second
# query uses that to compute key_updated_by (by finding which node has the
# corresponding key_updated_at).
# TODO: couplet_count will be wrong if any couplets don't have exactly twoMethod destroy_couplet has 28 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def destroy_couplet
k = children.order(:position).reload.to_a
return true if k.empty?
# TODO: handle multiple facetsDo not write to stdout. Use Rails's logger if you want to log. Open
puts Rainbow( (' ' * indent) + lead.text ).purple + ' ' + Rainbow( lead.node_position.to_s ).red + ' ' + Rainbow( lead.position ).blue + ' [.parent: ' + Rainbow(lead.parent&.text || 'none').gold + ']'- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for the use of output calls like puts and print
Example:
# bad
puts 'A debug message'
pp 'A debug message'
print 'A debug message'
# good
Rails.logger.debug 'A debug message'TODO found Open
# TODO: couplet_count will be wrong if any couplets don't have exactly two- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: Probably a helper method- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: handle multiple facets- Exclude checks
TODO found Open
# TODO: Probably a helper method- Exclude checks