Skip to content

Potential fix for code scanning alert no. 1876: Uncontrolled command line #807

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Draft
Bryan-Roe wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Potential fix for code scanning alert no. 1876: Uncontrolled command line #807

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 7 additions & 3 deletions mount/chat_integration.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -157,11 +157,15 @@
"--provider",
normalized_provider,
"--once",
"--",
message,
]

result = subprocess.run(cmd, capture_output=True, text=True, cwd=str(self.chat_path))
result = subprocess.run(
cmd,

Check failure

Code scanning / CodeQL

Uncontrolled command line Critical

This command line depends on a
user-provided value
Loading
.
input=message,
capture_output=True,
text=True,
cwd=str(self.chat_path),
)
Comment on lines +162 to +168

@bryan-roe-bot bryan-roe-bot Bot Jul 7, 2026

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.

Semgrep identified an issue in your code:
Detected subprocess function 'run' without a static string. If this data can be controlled by a malicious actor, it may be an instance of command injection. Audit the use of this call to ensure it is not controllable by an external resource. You may consider using 'shlex.escape()'.

To resolve this comment:

🔧 No guidance has been designated for this issue. Fix according to your organization's approved methods.

💬 Ignore this finding

Reply with Semgrep commands to ignore this finding.

  • /fp <comment> for false positive
  • /ar <comment> for acceptable risk
  • /other <comment> for all other reasons

Alternatively, triage in Semgrep AppSec Platform to ignore the finding created by dangerous-subprocess-use-audit.

You can view more details about this finding in the Semgrep AppSec Platform.


return {
"success": result.returncode == 0,
Expand Down
Loading