Xuanwo opened a new pull request, #25309:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/25309

   ## Which issue does this PR close?
   
   Fixes the [security audit 
failure](https://github.com/apache/datafusion/actions/runs/34914826729/job/104210077720)
 caused by 
[RUSTSEC-2026-0285](https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0285.html).
   
   ## Rationale for this change
   
   The locked rustls 0.23.39 accepts TLS 1.3 handshake messages across 
encryption level boundaries and now fails the security audit. Rustls 0.23.45 
fixes the vulnerability.
   
   ## What changes are included in this PR?
   
   Update rustls to 0.23.45 in Cargo.lock, together with its required 
aws-lc-rs, aws-lc-sys, and rustls-webpki dependency updates.
   
   ## What is the testing strategy for this PR?
   
   The existing security audit reproduces the vulnerability with the original 
lockfile and passes with the updated lockfile:
   
   ```sh
   cargo audit --ignore RUSTSEC-2026-0194 --ignore RUSTSEC-2026-0195
   ```
   
   The workspace extended tests also pass:
   
   ```sh
   RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo test --profile ci \
       --exclude datafusion-examples --exclude datafusion-benchmarks --exclude 
datafusion-cli \
       --workspace --lib --tests --bins \
       --features 
avro,json,backtrace,extended_tests,recursive_protection,parquet_encryption
   ```
   
   Also passed `cargo fmt --all`, `cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- 
-D warnings`, and `./dev/rust_lint.sh`.
   
   ## Are there any user-facing changes?
   
   Builds using the checked-in lockfile use the patched TLS implementation. No 
DataFusion API changes.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to