|
| 1 | +# Patching CVEs in Robusta: Automated Workflow |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +This skill automates the process of identifying and patching CVE vulnerabilities in the Robusta Docker image and Python dependencies, focusing on critical, high, and medium severity issues. |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +## Overview |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +The workflow follows this systematic process: |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +1. **Vulnerability Scanning** - Identify all CVEs in dependencies and Docker image |
| 10 | +2. **Severity Filtering** - Focus on critical, high, and medium severity issues |
| 11 | +3. **Root Cause Analysis** - Determine which packages/dependencies introduce vulnerabilities |
| 12 | +4. **Upstream Research** - Check if newer releases already include fixes |
| 13 | +5. **Patch Implementation** - Apply fixes via dependency upgrades or Dockerfile changes |
| 14 | +6. **Validation** - Verify CVE fixes and ensure application functionality |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +## Step-by-Step Process |
| 17 | + |
| 18 | +### 1. Vulnerability Scanning |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +Use multiple scanning tools to identify vulnerabilities: |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | +```bash |
| 23 | +# Scan Docker image for vulnerabilities |
| 24 | +docker build -t robusta:latest . |
| 25 | +docker scout cves robusta:latest |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +# Scan Python dependencies for vulnerabilities |
| 28 | +pip-audit |
| 29 | +safety check |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | +# Validate pyproject.toml metadata and lockfile consistency (does not perform vulnerability scanning) |
| 32 | +poetry check |
| 33 | +# For CVE scanning of Python dependencies, use pip-audit, safety, or poetry-audit-plugin |
| 34 | +``` |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +**What to extract:** |
| 37 | +- Affected package name and version |
| 38 | +- CVE ID and severity level |
| 39 | +- Fixed version (if available) |
| 40 | +- Affected version range |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +### 2. Severity Filtering |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +Process vulnerabilities in this order: |
| 45 | +1. **Critical** - Must be fixed before release |
| 46 | +2. **High** - Should be fixed before release |
| 47 | +3. **Medium** - Fix when safe and non-breaking |
| 48 | + |
| 49 | +Create a prioritized list and document each CVE: |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +``` |
| 52 | +CVE-XXXX-XXXXX (Critical): Package X - affects >=1.0.0,<1.2.0 |
| 53 | + Fixed in: 1.2.5 |
| 54 | + Status: Needs patching |
| 55 | +
|
| 56 | +CVE-YYYY-YYYYY (High): Package Y - affects >=2.0.0,<2.1.0 |
| 57 | + Fixed in: 2.1.3 |
| 58 | + Status: Needs patching |
| 59 | +``` |
| 60 | + |
| 61 | +### 3. Python Dependency Patches |
| 62 | + |
| 63 | +Two main strategies: |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | +**Strategy A: Direct Upgrade (Preferred)** |
| 66 | +- Check `poetry.lock` for affected packages |
| 67 | +- Update `pyproject.toml` with patched version |
| 68 | +- Run `poetry update package-name` |
| 69 | +- Verify in `poetry.lock` that lock file has updated to fixed version |
| 70 | + |
| 71 | +**Strategy B: Transitive Dependency Fix** |
| 72 | +- Identify the parent package bringing in vulnerable version |
| 73 | +- Upgrade parent package to one with updated dependencies |
| 74 | +- This automatically pulls in the fixed transitive dependency |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | + |
| 77 | +### 4. Dockerfile Patches |
| 78 | + |
| 79 | +For system-level vulnerabilities (non-Python packages): |
| 80 | + |
| 81 | +**Strategy A: Upgrade Base Image** |
| 82 | +- Check if newer Python 3.11-slim image includes fixes |
| 83 | +- Update FROM statement: `FROM python:3.11-slim` → newer version |
| 84 | + |
| 85 | +**Strategy B: Explicit Package Installation** |
| 86 | +- Add specific package upgrade in RUN commands |
| 87 | +- Example: `apt-get install -y libssl3` for OpenSSL CVEs |
| 88 | + |
| 89 | +**Strategy C: Apply Patches** |
| 90 | +- Use patching tools for targeted fixes in builder stage |
| 91 | +- Document with comments explaining which CVEs are fixed |
| 92 | + |
| 93 | +### 5. Validation Checklist |
| 94 | + |
| 95 | +✓ **CVE Verification** |
| 96 | +- Run `docker scout cves` again on patched image |
| 97 | +- Confirm target CVE no longer appears |
| 98 | +- Note any remaining high/critical issues for tracking |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | +✓ **Build Verification** |
| 101 | +```bash |
| 102 | +# Build the Docker image |
| 103 | +docker build -t robusta:test . |
| 104 | + |
| 105 | +# Verify build succeeds with no errors |
| 106 | +echo "Build successful" |
| 107 | +``` |
| 108 | + |
| 109 | +✓ **Functional Testing** |
| 110 | +```bash |
| 111 | +# Run basic smoke tests |
| 112 | +pytest tests/ -v |
| 113 | +``` |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +✓ **Dependency Check** |
| 116 | +```bash |
| 117 | +# Verify no new vulnerabilities introduced |
| 118 | +docker scout cves robusta:test --no-cache |
| 119 | + |
| 120 | +# Validate pyproject.toml metadata and lockfile consistency |
| 121 | +poetry check --lock |
| 122 | +``` |
| 123 | + |
| 124 | +### 6. Documentation |
| 125 | + |
| 126 | +Update these files with CVE fix details: |
| 127 | + |
| 128 | +**Dockerfile Comments:** |
| 129 | +```dockerfile |
| 130 | +# Patching CVE-XXXX-XXXXX (Critical): Package X |
| 131 | +RUN apt-get install -y package-name |
| 132 | +``` |
| 133 | + |
| 134 | +## Key Considerations |
| 135 | + |
| 136 | +### Python Package CVEs |
| 137 | +- Check if vulnerability is in the installed wheel vs source |
| 138 | +- For indirect dependencies, finding the transitive source is critical |
| 139 | +- Use `poetry why package-name` to understand dependency relationships |
| 140 | +- Go version matters for Go-based Python bindings (e.g., Cryptography) |
| 141 | + |
| 142 | +### System Library CVEs |
| 143 | +- libexpat1, libssl, libc vulnerabilities are common |
| 144 | +- These often have fixes in newer base images |
| 145 | +- When possible, upgrade the base Python image before manual fixes |
| 146 | + |
| 147 | +### Testing Strategy |
| 148 | +- Always rebuild and scan after each patch |
| 149 | +- One CVE at a time is safer; group similar fixes together |
| 150 | +- Document any CVEs that can't be patched with reasoning |
| 151 | + |
| 152 | +### Breaking Changes |
| 153 | +- Verify patched versions don't introduce breaking changes |
| 154 | +- Check release notes and migration guides |
| 155 | +- Run full test suite, not just smoke tests for major upgrades |
| 156 | + |
| 157 | +## Implementation Notes |
| 158 | + |
| 159 | +1. Work through CVEs in severity order (Critical → High → Medium) |
| 160 | +2. For each CVE, follow the complete cycle: identify → research → patch → validate |
| 161 | +3. Commit each logical group of fixes separately |
| 162 | +4. Keep diagnostics available: `docker scout cves` output, dependency trees, test results |
| 163 | +5. If a patch can't be safely applied, document why in the code comments |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | +## Common Issues and Solutions |
| 166 | + |
| 167 | +### Issue: Patch introduces breaking changes |
| 168 | +**Solution:** |
| 169 | +1. Check if breaking change is in major version bump |
| 170 | +2. Review if dependency needs to be pinned differently |
| 171 | +3. Consider if a workaround exists (e.g., compatibility shim) |
| 172 | + |
| 173 | +### Issue: Transitive dependency is vulnerable |
| 174 | +**Solution:** |
| 175 | +1. Find which package brings it in: `poetry why vulnerable-package` |
| 176 | +2. Update the parent package instead |
| 177 | +3. Re-lock dependencies and verify fix |
| 178 | + |
| 179 | +### Issue: CVE disappears after unrelated patch |
| 180 | +**Solution:** |
| 181 | +1. Good sign - often due to transitive dependency updates |
| 182 | +2. Still verify with `docker scout cves` on final image |
| 183 | +3. Update documentation to credit upstream fixes |
0 commit comments