dependency-graph/sbom shows wrong license information #149719
Replies: 3 comments
-
🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒 This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions: 1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as 2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own. 3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution. Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
the issue is still present |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒 This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions: 1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as 2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own. 3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution. Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Select Topic Area
Question
Body
hi,
I'm using the dependency-review-action and got an issue where during a dependency update the license of a dependency may have changed
so digged into the code and found out how the action is doing its magic:
it is using the github apis dependency-graph, like so:
resulting in
the logic if that should fail at all if MIT and/or OFL-1.1 is already allowed is out of question here
but it got me wondering, where does OFL-1.1 come from? looking at the repository, it doesn't have a license file but shows it in the readme: MIT
that is why returns 404, as far as i understand
the string
OFL-1.1
doesn't exist in the repo either, so it must be a dependency right?so i used
elliptic.dependencygraph.txt
which does not contain any
OFL-1.1
eitherso finally my question is: where does the OFL-1.1 license come from? :)
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions