Possible command injection Open
command_found = `#{command_test}`
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Injection is #1 on the 2010 OWASP Top Ten web security risks. Command injection occurs when shell commands unsafely include user-manipulatable values.
There are many ways to run commands in Ruby:
`ls #{params[:file]}`
system("ls #{params[:dir]}")
exec("md5sum #{params[:input]}")
Brakeman will warn on any method like these that uses user input or unsafely interpolates variables.
See the Ruby Security Guide for details.
Method has too many lines. [33/10] Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
- 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 missing_libs
has a Cognitive Complexity of 26 (exceeds 5 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
- 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
Assignment Branch Condition size for missing_libs is too high. [29.34/15] Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the ABC size of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The ABC size is based on assignments, branches (method calls), and conditions. See http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AbcMetric
Perceived complexity for missing_libs is too high. [15/7] Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop tries to produce a complexity score that's a measure of the
complexity the reader experiences when looking at a method. For that
reason it considers when
nodes as something that doesn't add as much
complexity as an if
or a &&
. Except if it's one of those special
case
/when
constructs where there's no expression after case
. Then
the cop treats it as an if
/elsif
/elsif
... and lets all the when
nodes count. In contrast to the CyclomaticComplexity cop, this cop
considers else
nodes as adding complexity.
Example:
def my_method # 1
if cond # 1
case var # 2 (0.8 + 4 * 0.2, rounded)
when 1 then func_one
when 2 then func_two
when 3 then func_three
when 4..10 then func_other
end
else # 1
do_something until a && b # 2
end # ===
end # 7 complexity points
Cyclomatic complexity for missing_libs is too high. [12/6] Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks that the cyclomatic complexity of methods is not higher than the configured maximum. The cyclomatic complexity is the number of linearly independent paths through a method. The algorithm counts decision points and adds one.
An if statement (or unless or ?:) increases the complexity by one. An else branch does not, since it doesn't add a decision point. The && operator (or keyword and) can be converted to a nested if statement, and ||/or is shorthand for a sequence of ifs, so they also add one. Loops can be said to have an exit condition, so they add one.
Method missing_libs
has 33 lines of code (exceeds 25 allowed). Consider refactoring. Open
def missing_libs(required_software, lib_type = 'gems', args = {})
missing_libs = []
required_libs = {}
required_software[lib_type].each do |key, value|
Use each_value
instead of values.each
. Open
required_libs.values.each do |lib|
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop checks for uses of each_key
and each_value
Hash methods.
Note: If you have an array of two-element arrays, you can put parentheses around the block arguments to indicate that you're not working with a hash, and suppress RuboCop offenses.
Example:
# bad
hash.keys.each { |k| p k }
hash.values.each { |v| p v }
hash.each { |k, _v| p k }
hash.each { |_k, v| p v }
# good
hash.each_key { |k| p k }
hash.each_value { |v| p v }
Favor modifier if
usage when having a single-line body. Another good alternative is the usage of control flow &&
/||
. Open
if command_found.blank?
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
Checks for if and unless statements that would fit on one line
if written as a modifier if/unless. The maximum line length is
configured in the Metrics/LineLength
cop.
Example:
# bad
if condition
do_stuff(bar)
end
unless qux.empty?
Foo.do_something
end
# good
do_stuff(bar) if condition
Foo.do_something unless qux.empty?
Prefer Object#is_a?
over Object#kind_of?
. Open
if !value.blank? && value.kind_of?(Hash)
- Read upRead up
- Exclude checks
This cop enforces consistent use of Object#is_a?
or Object#kind_of?
.
Example: EnforcedStyle: is_a? (default)
# bad
var.kind_of?(Date)
var.kind_of?(Integer)
# good
var.is_a?(Date)
var.is_a?(Integer)
Example: EnforcedStyle: kind_of?
# bad
var.is_a?(Time)
var.is_a?(String)
# good
var.kind_of?(Time)
var.kind_of?(String)