fix(sandbox): pass shell=False explicitly in bubblewrap capability probe - #2497
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Minimal successor to closed #2129, whose branch carried an unrelated 123-file deletion. Only the explicit shell=False argument, its mock assertions, and the sentinel learning are kept. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Hc6PJfasfUdUFzngfdMpWJ
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughBubblewrap 격리 기능 검사에서 subprocess 호출에 Changes격리 기능 검사
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Change: Refactor Suggested reviewers: Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to The probe’s execution behavior is unchanged, and the tests check that shell execution remains disabled. No material merge risk is identified. 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Full details: Docstring CoverageExplanation Docstring coverage is 60.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 5 functions across 2 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1📝 Generate docstrings 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Exact-head admission correction — Ready is review admission only. Fresh audit against base
This PR is moved to Draft/Proposed until the causal owner repair is present on a successor exact head and re-audited. Queued/pending work is neither an additional blocker nor passing evidence. No Close, force push, destructive rebase, manual rerun, synthetic status/approval, merge, auto-merge, or bypass was performed. |
Summary
Minimal successor to #2129 (closed: its branch deleted 16,869 lines across 123 files unrelated to the stated fix; the closing comment asked for a fresh minimal PR).
scripts/ci/sandboxed_web_e2e.py:_probe_isolation_capabilitypassesshell=Falseexplicitly tosubprocess.run. Behavior is unchanged (it is already the default); this matches the other twosubprocess.runcalls in the file and removes a Bandit-style ambiguity.tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py: both probe tests assertkwargs["shell"] is False..jules/sentinel.md: records the learning.Evidence
git diff --stat origin/main...HEAD: 3 files, +11/-0.pytest tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py: 68 passed.Developer experience: every subprocess call in the sandbox helper now states its shell posture explicitly.
User experience: no observable change.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01Hc6PJfasfUdUFzngfdMpWJ
Summary by CodeRabbit