mirror of
https://github.com/elicpeter/nyx.git
synced 2026-06-09 19:45:13 +02:00
[pitboss] sweep after phase 07: 6 deferred items resolved
This commit is contained in:
parent
bfdfcb9d1a
commit
25e8b0eb0e
6 changed files with 730 additions and 8 deletions
|
|
@ -118,6 +118,57 @@ pub fn log_path() -> Option<std::path::PathBuf> {
|
|||
events_log_path()
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ── Rank delta telemetry ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
|
||||
|
||||
/// One telemetry event per ranked finding that carries a dynamic verdict delta.
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// Emitted by `rank::rank_diags` for every diag whose dynamic verdict shifts
|
||||
/// its rank score (delta != 0). Used by the M7 calibration pipeline to tune
|
||||
/// the N/M boost/penalty constants from real-world verdict distributions.
|
||||
#[derive(Debug, serde::Serialize)]
|
||||
pub struct RankDeltaEvent {
|
||||
pub ts: String,
|
||||
/// Always `"rank_delta"` — distinguishes from verdict events in the log.
|
||||
pub event_type: &'static str,
|
||||
pub finding_id: String,
|
||||
/// `"Confirmed"`, `"NotConfirmed"`, etc.
|
||||
pub status: String,
|
||||
/// Signed delta applied to the rank score (+N for Confirmed, -M for NotConfirmed).
|
||||
pub delta: f64,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Write a rank-delta telemetry event to the events log.
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// Silently no-ops under the same conditions as [`emit`]:
|
||||
/// `NYX_NO_TELEMETRY=1`, unresolvable log dir, or write failure.
|
||||
pub fn emit_rank_delta(event: RankDeltaEvent) {
|
||||
if std::env::var("NYX_NO_TELEMETRY").as_deref() == Ok("1") {
|
||||
return;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
let Some(path) = events_log_path() else {
|
||||
return;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
let Ok(line) = serde_json::to_string(&event) else {
|
||||
return;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
let _ = (|| -> std::io::Result<()> {
|
||||
if let Some(parent) = path.parent() {
|
||||
fs::create_dir_all(parent)?;
|
||||
#[cfg(unix)]
|
||||
{
|
||||
use std::os::unix::fs::PermissionsExt;
|
||||
fs::set_permissions(parent, fs::Permissions::from_mode(0o700))?;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
let mut f = OpenOptions::new().create(true).append(true).open(&path)?;
|
||||
writeln!(f, "{line}")?;
|
||||
Ok(())
|
||||
})();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[cfg(test)]
|
||||
mod tests {
|
||||
use super::*;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
298
src/rank.rs
298
src/rank.rs
|
|
@ -206,6 +206,27 @@ pub fn rank_diags(diags: &mut [Diag]) {
|
|||
if !rank.components.is_empty() {
|
||||
d.rank_reason = Some(rank.components.clone());
|
||||
}
|
||||
// Emit rank-delta telemetry for M7 calibration (§21 / deferred M7 hook).
|
||||
// Only fires when the dynamic verdict shifted the score; benign verdicts
|
||||
// (Unsupported, Inconclusive, no verdict) produce delta = None and are
|
||||
// skipped — emitting them would add noise without calibration value.
|
||||
#[cfg(feature = "dynamic")]
|
||||
if let Some(delta) = dynamic_verdict_delta(d) {
|
||||
use crate::dynamic::telemetry::{self, RankDeltaEvent};
|
||||
let status = d
|
||||
.evidence
|
||||
.as_ref()
|
||||
.and_then(|ev| ev.dynamic_verdict.as_ref())
|
||||
.map(|dv| format!("{:?}", dv.status))
|
||||
.unwrap_or_default();
|
||||
telemetry::emit_rank_delta(RankDeltaEvent {
|
||||
ts: chrono::Utc::now().to_rfc3339(),
|
||||
event_type: "rank_delta",
|
||||
finding_id: d.finding_id.clone(),
|
||||
status,
|
||||
delta,
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
diags.sort_by(|a, b| {
|
||||
let sa = a.rank_score.unwrap_or(0.0);
|
||||
|
|
@ -225,6 +246,15 @@ pub fn rank_diags(diags: &mut [Diag]) {
|
|||
/// Returns `None` when there is no verdict (static-only scan) or the verdict
|
||||
/// does not change the score (Unsupported, Inconclusive).
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// Design note (§deferred M7 payload_corpus_complete): the spec originally
|
||||
/// distinguished `NotConfirmed` + `payload_corpus_complete == true` → `-M`
|
||||
/// from `NotConfirmed` + `NoPayloadsForCap` → no change. In practice the
|
||||
/// `NoPayloadsForCap` path always produces `Unsupported`, never `NotConfirmed`,
|
||||
/// so the two cases are already disjoint in the type. The heuristic
|
||||
/// `!dv.attempts.is_empty()` (corpus was actually tried) is equivalent to
|
||||
/// `payload_corpus_complete == true` for all reachable states — no extra
|
||||
/// field is needed. See also §deferred decision in `.pitboss/play/deferred.md`.
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// TODO(M7): N=20 and M=5 are placeholders; calibrate from telemetry.
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_delta(diag: &Diag) -> Option<f64> {
|
||||
use crate::evidence::VerifyStatus;
|
||||
|
|
@ -234,7 +264,8 @@ fn dynamic_verdict_delta(diag: &Diag) -> Option<f64> {
|
|||
// Apply penalty only when the corpus was actually exhausted (attempts
|
||||
// were made); a NotConfirmed with zero attempts means something went
|
||||
// wrong before payload execution, which is an Inconclusive path, not
|
||||
// a meaningful negative signal.
|
||||
// a meaningful negative signal. This is equivalent to the spec's
|
||||
// `payload_corpus_complete == true` condition (see design note above).
|
||||
VerifyStatus::NotConfirmed if !dv.attempts.is_empty() => Some(-5.0),
|
||||
_ => None,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1083,4 +1114,269 @@ mod tests {
|
|||
"Bail ({s_bail}) must rank at or below UnderReport ({s_under})"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// ── Dynamic verdict delta tests ────────────────────────────────────────
|
||||
|
||||
use crate::evidence::{AttemptSummary, Evidence, VerifyResult, VerifyStatus};
|
||||
|
||||
fn make_diag_with_verdict(verdict: Option<VerifyResult>) -> Diag {
|
||||
let mut d = make_diag(
|
||||
Severity::High,
|
||||
"taint-unsanitised-flow (source 1:1)",
|
||||
"src/main.rs",
|
||||
10,
|
||||
vec![("Source".into(), "stdin at 1:1".into())],
|
||||
false,
|
||||
);
|
||||
d.finding_id = "test_finding_id".into();
|
||||
if let Some(v) = verdict {
|
||||
d.evidence = Some(Evidence {
|
||||
dynamic_verdict: Some(v),
|
||||
..Default::default()
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
d
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn confirmed_verdict() -> VerifyResult {
|
||||
VerifyResult {
|
||||
finding_id: "test_finding_id".into(),
|
||||
status: VerifyStatus::Confirmed,
|
||||
triggered_payload: Some("sqli-tautology".into()),
|
||||
reason: None,
|
||||
inconclusive_reason: None,
|
||||
detail: None,
|
||||
attempts: vec![AttemptSummary {
|
||||
payload_label: "sqli-tautology".into(),
|
||||
exit_code: Some(0),
|
||||
timed_out: false,
|
||||
triggered: true,
|
||||
sink_hit: true,
|
||||
}],
|
||||
toolchain_match: Some("exact".into()),
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn not_confirmed_with_attempts() -> VerifyResult {
|
||||
VerifyResult {
|
||||
finding_id: "test_finding_id".into(),
|
||||
status: VerifyStatus::NotConfirmed,
|
||||
triggered_payload: None,
|
||||
reason: None,
|
||||
inconclusive_reason: None,
|
||||
detail: None,
|
||||
attempts: vec![AttemptSummary {
|
||||
payload_label: "sqli-tautology".into(),
|
||||
exit_code: Some(0),
|
||||
timed_out: false,
|
||||
triggered: false,
|
||||
sink_hit: false,
|
||||
}],
|
||||
toolchain_match: Some("exact".into()),
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn not_confirmed_no_attempts() -> VerifyResult {
|
||||
VerifyResult {
|
||||
finding_id: "test_finding_id".into(),
|
||||
status: VerifyStatus::NotConfirmed,
|
||||
triggered_payload: None,
|
||||
reason: None,
|
||||
inconclusive_reason: None,
|
||||
detail: None,
|
||||
attempts: vec![],
|
||||
toolchain_match: None,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn unsupported_verdict() -> VerifyResult {
|
||||
VerifyResult {
|
||||
finding_id: "test_finding_id".into(),
|
||||
status: VerifyStatus::Unsupported,
|
||||
triggered_payload: None,
|
||||
reason: Some(crate::evidence::UnsupportedReason::NoPayloadsForCap),
|
||||
inconclusive_reason: None,
|
||||
detail: None,
|
||||
attempts: vec![],
|
||||
toolchain_match: None,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn inconclusive_verdict() -> VerifyResult {
|
||||
VerifyResult {
|
||||
finding_id: "test_finding_id".into(),
|
||||
status: VerifyStatus::Inconclusive,
|
||||
triggered_payload: None,
|
||||
reason: None,
|
||||
inconclusive_reason: Some(crate::evidence::InconclusiveReason::BuildFailed),
|
||||
detail: None,
|
||||
attempts: vec![],
|
||||
toolchain_match: None,
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_confirmed_delta_is_positive() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(confirmed_verdict()));
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
Some(20.0),
|
||||
"Confirmed must produce +20 delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_not_confirmed_with_attempts_delta_is_negative() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(not_confirmed_with_attempts()));
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
Some(-5.0),
|
||||
"NotConfirmed with attempts must produce -5 delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_not_confirmed_no_attempts_no_delta() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(not_confirmed_no_attempts()));
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
None,
|
||||
"NotConfirmed with zero attempts must produce no delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_unsupported_no_delta() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(unsupported_verdict()));
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
None,
|
||||
"Unsupported must produce no delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_inconclusive_no_delta() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(inconclusive_verdict()));
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
None,
|
||||
"Inconclusive must produce no delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_no_verdict_no_delta() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(None);
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&d),
|
||||
None,
|
||||
"No verdict must produce no delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_confirmed_ranks_above_no_verdict() {
|
||||
let confirmed = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(confirmed_verdict()));
|
||||
let no_verdict = make_diag_with_verdict(None);
|
||||
|
||||
let s_confirmed = compute_attack_rank(&confirmed).score;
|
||||
let s_none = compute_attack_rank(&no_verdict).score;
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
s_confirmed > s_none,
|
||||
"Confirmed ({s_confirmed}) must rank above no-verdict ({s_none})"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_no_verdict_ranks_above_not_confirmed_with_attempts() {
|
||||
let no_verdict = make_diag_with_verdict(None);
|
||||
let not_confirmed = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(not_confirmed_with_attempts()));
|
||||
|
||||
let s_none = compute_attack_rank(&no_verdict).score;
|
||||
let s_nc = compute_attack_rank(¬_confirmed).score;
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
s_none > s_nc,
|
||||
"No-verdict ({s_none}) must rank above NotConfirmed-with-attempts ({s_nc})"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_unsupported_same_as_no_verdict() {
|
||||
let no_verdict = make_diag_with_verdict(None);
|
||||
let unsupported = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(unsupported_verdict()));
|
||||
|
||||
let s_none = compute_attack_rank(&no_verdict).score;
|
||||
let s_uns = compute_attack_rank(&unsupported).score;
|
||||
// Unsupported carries a 4-field Evidence struct so evidence_strength
|
||||
// differs slightly from a None evidence diag. What matters is that
|
||||
// the *delta component* is zero — both deltas must agree.
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&no_verdict),
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&unsupported),
|
||||
"Unsupported and no-verdict must both produce None delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
// Same base inputs → scores differ only by evidence_strength bonus
|
||||
// from the Evidence wrapper. Verify no "dynamic_verdict" component
|
||||
// in rank_reason.
|
||||
let rank = compute_attack_rank(&unsupported);
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
!rank.components.iter().any(|(k, _)| k == "dynamic_verdict"),
|
||||
"Unsupported must not appear in rank_reason components"
|
||||
);
|
||||
let _ = s_none;
|
||||
let _ = s_uns;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_inconclusive_same_delta_as_no_verdict() {
|
||||
let no_verdict = make_diag_with_verdict(None);
|
||||
let inconclusive = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(inconclusive_verdict()));
|
||||
|
||||
assert_eq!(
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&no_verdict),
|
||||
dynamic_verdict_delta(&inconclusive),
|
||||
"Inconclusive and no-verdict must both produce None delta"
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_confirmed_rank_reason_contains_component() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(confirmed_verdict()));
|
||||
let rank = compute_attack_rank(&d);
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
rank.components.iter().any(|(k, _)| k == "dynamic_verdict"),
|
||||
"Confirmed verdict must appear in rank_reason components"
|
||||
);
|
||||
let dv_component = rank
|
||||
.components
|
||||
.iter()
|
||||
.find(|(k, _)| k == "dynamic_verdict")
|
||||
.unwrap();
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
dv_component.1.starts_with('+'),
|
||||
"Confirmed delta must be positive in rank_reason: {:?}",
|
||||
dv_component.1
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#[test]
|
||||
fn dynamic_verdict_not_confirmed_rank_reason_contains_negative_component() {
|
||||
let d = make_diag_with_verdict(Some(not_confirmed_with_attempts()));
|
||||
let rank = compute_attack_rank(&d);
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
rank.components.iter().any(|(k, _)| k == "dynamic_verdict"),
|
||||
"NotConfirmed-with-attempts must appear in rank_reason components"
|
||||
);
|
||||
let dv_component = rank
|
||||
.components
|
||||
.iter()
|
||||
.find(|(k, _)| k == "dynamic_verdict")
|
||||
.unwrap();
|
||||
assert!(
|
||||
dv_component.1.starts_with('-'),
|
||||
"NotConfirmed delta must be negative in rank_reason: {:?}",
|
||||
dv_component.1
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue