-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
Sensitive api #20
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Sensitive api #20
Conversation
case method(_, _, nm, _, _, _): name = name+nm; | ||
|
||
} | ||
return name; | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we really need these functions to implement the feature of mining calls to sensitive APIs? Perhaps you have implemented them just to familiarize yourselves with the architecture / and the Rascal language. If this is the case, I would recommend removing these methods.
}; | ||
|
||
return ""; | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should discuss again this implementation. IMO, we should simplify the interface of the sensitiveFind
function. Actually, even the name is not really good. It should receive two arguments: a list of strings with the signature of sensitive methods and an ExecutionContext. Only in this way I could use this implementation in a pipeline with a set of analyzes. This is a bit tough to explain here.
The first implementation of the module to collect sensitive APIs from invoked methods