Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BB2-2361 Bump django version to 3.2.19 to address vulerability #1119

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 6, 2023

Conversation

ajshred
Copy link
Contributor

@ajshred ajshred commented Jul 5, 2023

JIRA Ticket:
BB2-2361

User Story or Bug Summary:
Django 3.2.19 fixes a security issue with severity “low” in 3.2.18.
UPDATE
After pushing PR a new issue came up and we are now moving to 3.2.20

What Does This PR Do?

Updates to Django 3.2.20

What Should Reviewers Watch For?

  • verify app passes all tests

What Security Implications Does This PR Have?

Submitters should complete the following questionnaire:

  • If the answer to any of the questions below is Yes, then here's a link to the associated Security Impact Assessment (SIA), security checklist, or other similar document in Confluence: N/A.
    • Does this PR add any new software dependencies? No.
    • Does this PR modify or invalidate any of our security controls? No.
    • Does this PR store or transmit data that was not stored or transmitted before? No.
  • If the answer to any of the questions below is Yes, then please add StewGoin as a reviewer, and note that this PR should not be merged unless/until he also approves it.
    • Do you think this PR requires additional review of its security implications for other reasons? No.

Any Migrations?

  • Yes, there are migrations
    • The migrations should be run PRIOR to the code being deployed
    • The migrations should be run AFTER the code is deployed
    • There is a more complicated migration plan (downtime, etc)
  • No migrations

Submitter Checklist

I have gone through and verified that...:

  • This PR is reasonably limited in scope, to help ensure that:
    1. It doesn't unnecessarily tie a bunch of disparate features, fixes, refactorings, etc. together.
    2. There isn't too much of a burden on reviewers.
    3. Any problems it causes have a small "blast radius".
    4. It'll be easier to rollback if that becomes necessary.
  • I have named this PR and its branch such that they'll be automatically be linked to the (most) relevant Jira issue, per: https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiracloud/integrating-with-development-tools-776636216.html.
  • This PR includes any required documentation changes, including README updates and changelog / release notes entries.
  • All new and modified code is appropriately commented, such that the what and why of its design would be reasonably clear to engineers, preferably ones unfamiliar with the project.
  • All tech debt and/or shortcomings introduced by this PR are detailed in TODO and/or FIXME comments, which include a JIRA ticket ID for any items that require urgent attention.
  • Reviews are requested from both:
    • At least two other engineers on this project, at least one of whom is a senior engineer or owns the relevant component(s) here.
    • Any relevant engineers on other projects (e.g. BFD, SLS, etc.).
  • Any deviations from the other policies in the DASG Engineering Standards are specifically called out in this PR, above.
    • Please review the standards every few months to ensure you're familiar with them.

@ajshred ajshred requested review from oragame and dtisza1 July 5, 2023 19:05
@oragame
Copy link
Contributor

oragame commented Jul 6, 2023

do we want to stick with 19 or go to 20? Dependabot PR came out right after you put yours up
#1120

@ajshred
Copy link
Contributor Author

ajshred commented Jul 6, 2023

Ugh. No let's go to 20. I'll push an update.

Copy link
Contributor

@oragame oragame left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

Copy link
Contributor

@dtisza1 dtisza1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me!

Tested well locally.

@ajshred ajshred merged commit 1440c8f into master Jul 6, 2023
6 checks passed
@jimmyfagan jimmyfagan deleted the ajones/bb2-2361-bump-django-version branch May 21, 2024 22:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants