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

fix: add alternate trivy db sources #283

Merged

Conversation

clay-lake
Copy link
Contributor

@clay-lake clay-lake commented Nov 8, 2024

Ping the @canonical/rocks team.


Features in this PR:

@clay-lake clay-lake marked this pull request as ready for review November 8, 2024 12:59
@clay-lake clay-lake requested a review from a team as a code owner November 8, 2024 12:59
@cjdcordeiro
Copy link
Collaborator

Interesting. I'm sure ECR will also have rate limits, but given that this is such a simple change, we can give it a try.

Can you also change this: https://github.com/canonical/rocks-pipelines/blob/main/src/rocks/tests/Vulnerability-Scan.py (that's used in other legacy pipelines)

Copy link
Contributor

@SamirPS SamirPS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@clay-lake
Copy link
Contributor Author

Lets see how it goes. :) I just updated trivy's action to support multiple trivy-db sources. If that is not enough we can cache the db in a private repo.

@clay-lake clay-lake merged commit 000b072 into main Nov 8, 2024
2 checks passed
@clay-lake clay-lake deleted the ROCKS-1618/come-up-with-a-solution-for-the-recent-trivy-issues branch November 8, 2024 14:57
@clay-lake clay-lake restored the ROCKS-1618/come-up-with-a-solution-for-the-recent-trivy-issues branch November 8, 2024 21:18
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.

3 participants