Skip to content

Conversation

rohanshah18
Copy link
Contributor

Problem

The Pinecone Python client is currently using protobuf version ^5.29, which includes vulnerable versions that are affected by GHSA-8qvm-5x2c-j2w7. This vulnerability involves uncontrolled recursion in Protobuf's pure-Python backend, which could lead to Denial of Service (DoS) attacks.

Solution

Updated the protobuf dependency constraint from ^5.29 to ^5.29.5 to ensure we're using the patched version that addresses this security vulnerability. The changes include:

  • Updated pyproject.toml: Changed protobuf version constraint from ^5.29 to ^5.29.5
  • Updated testing-dependency-grpc.yaml: Updated protobuf version from 5.29.1 to 5.29.5 in all three dependency testing matrix configurations
  • Verified that poetry.lock already contains protobuf 5.29.5, so no additional lock file updates were needed

This is a patch version update, so no breaking changes are expected. The protobuf dependency is optional and only installed when the grpc extra is requested.

Note: This is a security patch release to address the immediate vulnerability for existing users. A future release will include a comprehensive update to protobuf 6.x, which may include breaking changes and will require more extensive testing and migration planning.

Type of Change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update
  • Infrastructure change (CI configs, etc)
  • Non-code change (docs, etc)
  • None of the above: (explain here)

Test Plan

  • Verified protobuf 5.29.5 is already installed and working
  • Updated CI/CD pipeline to test with the new version
  • No breaking changes expected as this is a patch version update

Copy link
Contributor

@austin-denoble austin-denoble left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems reasonable to me, thanks for following up on this.

I'll defer to @jhamon for any Python specifics around this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants