CVE-2007-4559 Patch

[TrellixVulnTeam]

Patching CVE-2007-4559

Hi, we are security researchers from the Advanced Research Center at Trellix. We have began a campaign to patch a widespread bug named CVE-2007-4559. CVE-2007-4559 is a 15 year old bug in the Python tarfile package. By using extract() or extractall() on a tarfile object without sanitizing input, a maliciously crafted .tar file could perform a directory path traversal attack. We found at least one unsantized extractall() in your codebase and are providing a patch for you via pull request. The patch essentially checks to see if all tarfile members will be extracted safely and throws an exception otherwise. We encourage you to use this patch or your own solution to secure against CVE-2007-4559. Further technical information about the vulnerability can be found in this blog.

If you have further questions you may contact us through this projects lead researcher Kasimir Schulz.

[sourcery-ai]

Sourcery Code Quality Report

❌  Merging this PR will decrease code quality in the affected files by 7.76%.

Quality metrics	Before	After	Change
Complexity	3.70 ⭐	6.52 ⭐	2.82 👎
Method Length	111.86 🙂	125.43 😞	13.57 👎
Working memory	7.79 🙂	4.51 ⭐	-3.28 👍
Quality	65.45% 🙂	57.69% 🙂	-7.76% 👎

Other metrics	Before	After	Change
Lines	124	143	19

Changed files	Quality Before	Quality After	Quality Change
98-dados/programacao_distribuida_com_DASK/prep.py	65.45% 🙂	57.69% 🙂	-7.76% 👎

Here are some functions in these files that still need a tune-up:

File	Function	Complexity	Length	Working Memory	Quality	Recommendation
98-dados/programacao_distribuida_com_DASK/prep.py	flights	12 🙂	321 ⛔		37.01% 😞	Try splitting into smaller methods
98-dados/programacao_distribuida_com_DASK/prep.py	create_weather	6 ⭐	195 😞	9 🙂	54.91% 🙂	Try splitting into smaller methods
98-dados/programacao_distribuida_com_DASK/prep.py	accounts_json	2 ⭐	109 🙂	10 😞	65.80% 🙂	Extract out complex expressions

Legend and Explanation

The emojis denote the absolute quality of the code:

• ⭐ excellent
• 🙂 good
• 😞 poor
• ⛔ very poor

The 👍 and 👎 indicate whether the quality has improved or gotten worse with this pull request.

---

Please see our documentation here for details on how these metrics are calculated.

We are actively working on this report - lots more documentation and extra metrics to come!

Help us improve this quality report!