Skip to content

chore: sync develop_v4 with stage_v4 - #644

Closed
kirtesh-cstk wants to merge 11 commits into
develop_v4from
stage_v4
Closed

kirtesh-cstk wants to merge 11 commits into
develop_v4from
stage_v4

Conversation

@kirtesh-cstk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

develop_v4 is behind stage_v4 by the 4.5.0 release commits and the security bump that followed, so anything branched off develop_v4 today starts without them. This merges stage_v4 back into develop_v4.

What comes in:

Merges clean, no conflicts. #640 is the other direction (develop_v4 into stage_v4) and stays open.


🤖 Generated with Claude Code

karancs06 and others added 11 commits August 5, 2026 16:21
develop to stage 6 aug release
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
DOMPurify before 3.4.13 has an XSS bypass where IN_PLACE sanitization
combined with element-removal hooks can leave a detached DOM subtree
with executable event handlers (GHSA-55q2-fjhq-7xh7).

Bumps the dependency from ^3.4.12 to ^3.4.13, the first patched release.

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Clears 9 advisories (8 high, 1 moderate) in postcss, vite, and ws.
Lockfile only; no package.json ranges changed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Spec fixtures used ad hoc api key strings that read like real stack keys
(bltanything, bltapikey, livePreviewApiKey123, test-key), so sample data was
hard to tell apart from meaningful values.

Replace them all with YOUR_API_KEY. The one exception is the test asserting
that a user-config api key takes precedence over an SDK header api key, where
the header keeps a distinct YOUR_HEADER_API_KEY so the assertion still proves
precedence rather than passing trivially.

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
…hook-removal

fix(security): bump dompurify to patch XSS vulnerability
…lues-in-tests

chore(tests): standardize api key placeholder values in specs
@kirtesh-cstk
kirtesh-cstk requested a review from a team as a code owner September 10, 2026 09:11
@snyk-io

snyk-io Bot commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Snyk checks have passed. No issues have been found so far.

Status Scan Engine Critical High Medium Low Total (0)
Open Source Security 0 0 0 0 0 issues
Licenses 0 0 0 0 0 issues
Code Security 0 0 0 0 0 issues

💻 Catch issues earlier using the plugins for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, and Eclipse.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔒 Security Scan Results

ℹ️ Note: Only vulnerabilities with available fixes (upgrades or patches) are counted toward thresholds.

Check Type Count (with fixes) Without fixes Threshold Result
🔴 Critical Severity 0 0 10 ✅ Passed
🟠 High Severity 0 0 25 ✅ Passed
🟡 Medium Severity 0 0 500 ✅ Passed
🔵 Low Severity 0 0 1000 ✅ Passed

⏱️ SLA Breach Summary

✅ No SLA breaches detected. All vulnerabilities are within acceptable time thresholds.

Severity Breaches (with fixes) Breaches (no fixes) SLA Threshold (with/no fixes) Status
🔴 Critical 0 0 15 / 30 days ✅ Passed
🟠 High 0 0 30 / 120 days ✅ Passed
🟡 Medium 0 0 90 / 365 days ✅ Passed
🔵 Low 0 0 180 / 365 days ✅ Passed

✅ BUILD PASSED - All security checks passed

@karancs06 karancs06 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!!

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage Report

Status Category Percentage Covered / Total
🔵 Lines 67.43% 2530 / 3752
🔵 Statements 66.28% 2570 / 3877
🔵 Functions 64.71% 453 / 700
🔵 Branches 61.98% 1531 / 2470
File CoverageNo changed files found.
Generated in workflow #900 for commit 2074acf by the Vitest Coverage Report Action

@kirtesh-cstk
kirtesh-cstk requested a review from a team September 10, 2026 09:20

@hitesh-shetty-cstk hitesh-shetty-cstk left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!!

@kirtesh-cstk

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Superseded by #645, which is develop_v4 with stage_v4 merged in and so is not stuck behind the base branch.

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.

4 participants