🛡️ Sentinel: [MEDIUM] Fix bare except blocks - #32
Conversation
Co-authored-by: NoWon1 <126711057+NoWon1@users.noreply.github.com>
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
🚨 Severity: MEDIUM
💡 Vulnerability: The codebase contained multiple instances of bare
except:blocks, which broadly catch all exceptions (including critical system signals likeKeyboardInterruptandSystemExit).🎯 Impact: This can prevent the program from gracefully terminating on critical system errors, potentially masking severe application-level crashes or creating localized Denial of Service (DoS) due to hanging processes that ignore kill signals.
🔧 Fix: Replaced all 6 instances of bare
except:withexcept Exception:inSimulation/CancerInvasionSteppables.py. This ensures only standard runtime errors are caught. Added an AST-based test to prevent regressions. Also updated.gitignoreto prevent tracking compiled python files.✅ Verification: Ensure tests pass via
PYTHONPATH=$(pwd) python -m pytestand no regression issues are detected.PR created automatically by Jules for task 15391639170405709224 started by @NoWon1