fix: prevent 0001-01-01 published dates in Debian converter#5149
Merged
jess-lowe merged 2 commits intogoogle:masterfrom Mar 30, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Modify `vulnfeeds/cmd/converters/debian/main.go` to only set the `Published` field if the associated NVD CVE published time is not zero. This avoids generating `0001-01-01T00:00:00Z` dates which hide records from the /list page and trigger schema validation warnings. Co-authored-by: jess-lowe <86962800+jess-lowe@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Modify
vulnfeeds/cmd/converters/debian/main.goto only set thePublishedfield if the associated NVD CVE published time is not zero. This avoids generating0001-01-01T00:00:00Zdates which hide records from the /list page and trigger schema validation warnings.Some of these cases don't even have valid upstream CVEs: #4694, which is weird. Maybe we shouldn't be publishing them at all?
Making this PR anyway to catch the cases that should be valid.
this should close #4694