Make Severity configurable for ignoreNotFound#612
Open
hexa2k9 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
|
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
We rely on vault-action a lot to fetch secrets used in Actions Workflows from Vault. We use a Structure in Vault based on a path taken from the
github.repositorywhich may or may not exist in Vault. For some of those paths we ignore failure using thewith.ignoreNotFound(and it's fine). The paths which don't exist in Vault however cause an error annotation on the Workflow Summary.The behavior was originally discussed in #518 and I'd not want to challenge the "error" default but it causes some noise for us which this PR should address.
Setting
with.ignoreNotFoundSeveritytoinfowill silence those expected errors.Checklist
Community Note
reaction
to the original pull request comment to help the community and maintainers
prioritize this request
followers and do not help prioritize the request
PCI review checklist
I have documented a clear reason for, and description of, the change I am making.
If applicable, I've documented a plan to revert these changes if they require more than reverting the pull request.
If applicable, I've documented the impact of any changes to security controls.
Examples of changes to security controls include using new access control methods, adding or removing logging pipelines, etc.