-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 465
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 465
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
detect-secrets not scanning files in nested directories #876
Comments
Darguelles
changed the title
detect-secrets not scanning files nested directories
detect-secrets not scanning files in nested directories
Aug 14, 2024
Hi @Darguelles, thank you for opening this issue 😄 There's a PR related to this issue (#774) which is in a semi-abandoned state. I'd encourage you to pick it up and open a PR yourself so we can merge it to master |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I'm submitting a ...
What is the current behavior?
I'm using detect-secrets 1.5.0, from a
repo_directory
initialised with git. Inside this repository there is a nested folder namedinner
, with its own baseline file and some test files with secrets to be detected, all files tracked by git.When I run
detect-secrets scan inner/
it successfully updates the baseline in the root directory. If I specify the baseline inside inner directory, it is updated too.When I cd into
inner
directory and rundetect-secrets scan
, then no secrets on the files are not detected and the baseline only updates the generated_at field.git add .
to track the files with git.cd
into nested directory. Rundetect-secrets scan
. The secrets baseline is not updated and result is empty.What is the expected behavior?
detect-secrets scan
should detect secrets on the directory it's being executed.What is the motivation / use case for changing the behavior?
It's a use case for scanning on specific folders without need to specify the path at root level.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: