You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There may be a discrepancy with the intoto vuln predicate (if i interpret it right).
It looks like the spec specifies scanner.result.[*].vulnerability, optional object indicates a nested vulnerability object, but within the example, it shows no intermediary "vulnerability" object.
Decision was to be fixed in v0.2 which is merged in #345. However, the invocation part of it is still a problem, i will create a PR to fix it directly on v0.2 since it is reasonable that the impact of spec implementors is minimal due to it being recent.
There may be a discrepancy with the intoto vuln predicate (if i interpret it right).
It looks like the spec specifies
scanner.result.[*].vulnerability, optional object
indicates a nestedvulnerability
object, but within the example, it shows no intermediary "vulnerability" object.It seems like the intent is to have
scanner.result.[*] optional object
instead ofscanner.result.[*].vulnerability, optional object
?EDIT:
A similar discrepancy seems to hold with the severity field, where it is not specified as a list but shows as a list.
scanner.result.[*].vulnerability.severity, required object
but the example shows a list
EDIT 2:
Invocation also exists in the example, not part of the spec:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: