Enable group level vulnerability report grouping
What does this MR do and why?
Enable group level vulnerability report grouping
Introduce the feature behind the :group_level_vulnerability_report_grouping feature flag.
Screenshots or screen recordings
Screenshots are required for UI changes, and strongly recommended for all other merge requests.
| Before | After |
|---|---|
 |
 |
How to set up and validate locally
- Enable
:group_level_vulnerability_report_groupingfeature flag
echo "Feature.enable(:group_level_vulnerability_report_grouping)" | rails c
- Create a group with vulnerabilities
- Fork https://gitlab.com/gitlab-examples/security/security-reports/ and add it under the created group
- Run a pipeline against the default branch to populate vulnerabilities
- Visit Group > Secure > Vulnerability Report
- Test the Group By feature
MR acceptance checklist
This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
-
I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.
Related to #431633 (closed)
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %16.7
assigned to @svedova
- A deleted user
added backend feature flag frontend labels
1 Warning 
8903adf7: The commit body should not contain more than 72 characters per line. For more information, take a look at our Commit message guidelines. 1 Message 
CHANGELOG missing: If this merge request needs a changelog entry, add the
Changelogtrailer to the commit message you want to add to the changelog.If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.
Reviewer roulette
Changes that require review have been detected!
Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:
Category Reviewer Maintainer backend @imand3r
(UTC-8, 9 hours behind author)@rzwambag (UTC+1, same timezone as author)frontend @mcavoj (UTC+1, same timezone as author)@ekigbo (UTC+11, 10 hours ahead of author)Please check reviewer's status!
-
Reviewer is available!
-
Reviewer is unavailable!
Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.
To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.
Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.
If needed, you can retry the
danger-reviewjob that generated this comment.Generated by
Edited by Ghost User-
Resolved by Savas Vedova@lorenzvanherwaarden would you like to review this one? It's a simple MR which actually does quite a lot
- Last reply by Savas Vedova
requested review from @lorenzvanherwaarden
mentioned in issue #431633 (closed)
-
@beckalippert can you please review this MR?
requested review from @beckalippert
Bundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 1b70913d and a69b52bc
Entrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 4.1 MB 4.1 MB - 0.0 % mainChunk 3.04 MB 3.04 MB - 0.0 %
Note: We do not have exact data for 1b70913d. So we have used data from: 23f9137d.
The intended commit has no webpack pipeline, so we chose the last commit with one before it.Please look at the full report for more details
Read more about how this report works.
Generated by
Allure report
allure-report-publishergenerated test report!e2e-test-on-gdk:
expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Data Stores | 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | ✅ | | Verify | 31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | ✅ | | Create | 48 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 57 | ✅ | | Manage | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Govern | 57 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 57 | ✅ | | Plan | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 55 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 222 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 234 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+e2e-package-and-test:
expand test summary
+-------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Govern | 176 | 0 | 14 | 2 | 190 | ❗ | +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 176 | 0 | 14 | 2 | 190 | ❗ | +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+e2e-review-qa:
expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Govern | 47 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 53 | ❌ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Plan | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Create | 6 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 10 | ❌ | | Data Stores | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | ModelOps | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Framework sanity | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 62 | 6 | 8 | 2 | 76 | ❌ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+Edited by Ghost User
