feat: migrate to using .safety-ignore.yml file#1215
Open
Conversation
.safety-ignore.yml file
SMoraisAnsys
requested changes
Mar 18, 2026
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From the last comment in #1204, there was also the idea of allowing users to specify their own safety config file. Could you follow the logic we have for bandit (input bandit-configfile) for safety ? Also, could you update the documentation to let users know that any use of those config files requires inputs.checkout to be true.
…ctions into feat/improve-vuln-action
vgelbgras
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2026
Contributor
|
@RobPasMue FYI concerning allowing a custom safety policy file. Are we sure we want to allow that? |
Member
Author
Sorry - hadn't seen it. Developed the PR based on the feedback in this one - not #1203. Let's talk offline |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow up from #1204. Based on @vgelbgras's initial implementation