You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am not convinced this is something we should fix in the JSON schema, or even if we want to be bothered with it.
But strongly typed languages interpret "1" and "1.0" differently and can cause errors when combining values across CVE records with different types. This is heavily debated in the JSON Schema definition: json-schema/json-schema#27
There are several fields in CVE records, specifically in the CVSS (metrics) section, that have different data types when parsing in python, but I am not sure if this is something we need to tackle at the data storage/validation step.
Some clarification to add, the JSON specification does not differentiate between float and int data types, it allows strings, numbers and literals (null, true, false). So all but the last one listed above is valid JSON across the records.
So this is more of a formatting request that numbers in the fields above be formated with a ".0" appended if they are integers. But I don't feel very strongly about this change, it would help the json parsing in languages like python though.
Also, the containers.cna.metrics.other.content.version is a separate issue, not sure what the schema says about that field, but it is represented as both a number and string across different JSON records.
I am not convinced this is something we should fix in the JSON schema, or even if we want to be bothered with it.
But strongly typed languages interpret "1" and "1.0" differently and can cause errors when combining values across CVE records with different types. This is heavily debated in the JSON Schema definition: json-schema/json-schema#27
There are several fields in CVE records, specifically in the CVSS (metrics) section, that have different data types when parsing in python, but I am not sure if this is something we need to tackle at the data storage/validation step.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: