|
|
|
|
|
by woodruffw
117 days ago
|
|
In practice this isn’t as big of a hurdle as you might expect: Python is fundamentally dynamic, but most non-obfuscated Python is essentially static in terms of callgraph/reachability. That means that “this specific API is vulnerable” is something you can almost always pinpoint usage for in real Python codebases. The bigger problem is actually encoding vulnerable API information (not just vulnerable package ranges) in a way that’s useful and efficient to query. (Source: I maintain pip-audit, where this has been a long-standing feature request. We’re still mostly in a place of lacking good metadata from vulnerability feeds to enable it.) |
|