🛡️ Sentinel: [security improvement] Fix implicit shell usage in probe capability

[seonghobae]

🚨 Severity: MEDIUM
💡 Vulnerability: scripts/ci/sandboxed_web_e2e.py 파일 내 _probe_isolation_capability 함수의 subprocess.run 호출에 shell=False 인자가 명시되어 있지 않아, Bandit 보안 검사에서 잠재적인 암묵적 셸 사용 취약점(B603)으로 보고되었습니다.
🎯 Impact: 현재 입력값이 하드코딩되어 있어 즉각적인 취약점은 없으나, 향후 외부 입력값이 명령어로 전달될 경우 셸 삽입(Shell Injection) 공격에 노출될 수 있습니다.
🔧 Fix: subprocess.run 호출 시 shell=False 인자를 명시적으로 추가하여 암묵적인 셸 실행을 방지했습니다. 또한 tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py 내의 모의(Mock) 함수인 _fake_run이 kwargs를 캡처하도록 업데이트하고, shell 인자가 False로 전달되었는지 검증하는 assertion을 추가하여 보안 속성을 보장합니다.
✅ Verification: 전체 테스트 슈트를 실행하여 100% 코드 커버리지를 유지하고 모든 테스트가 성공하는 것을 확인했습니다 (pytest, interrogate).

---

PR created automatically by Jules for task 4100240205001182484 started by @seonghobae

[google-labs-jules]

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

---

For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

Next included review available in 54 minutes.

Check out review usage here.

View limit details

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available.

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

Learn how review limits work.

Review configuration:

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Team

Run ID: 2c9d5ceb-5fe1-4bd3-927d-1a74188a98e1

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6f8c51d and 3509d9f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• scripts/ci/sandboxed_web_e2e.py
• tests/test_sandboxed_web_e2e.py

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[seonghobae]

Independent verification (host 1 session, 2026-09-05).

Behavior: no change. The call this PR edits (scripts/ci/sandboxed_web_e2e.py:237, _probe_isolation_capability) passes probe_command, a Python list built at :225-235, so subprocess.run already runs with shell=False — that is the keyword's default for list argv. Adding it explicitly changes nothing at runtime.

Consistency: yes. The file's two other subprocess call sites already spell it out (:461 in the Popen at :453, :603 in the run at :594), so this makes the third site match the file's own convention. The test extension pins the kwarg (captured["kwargs"].get("shell") is False), which is the right shape for a convention pin.

Scope check: +1/-0 and +2/-0, exactly as described; no other files. Nothing to repair. This is a normal-path PR, not a bypass candidate — it should just go through review.

[google-labs-jules]

Independent verification (host 1 session, 2026-09-05).

Behavior: no change. The call this PR edits (scripts/ci/sandboxed_web_e2e.py:237, _probe_isolation_capability) passes probe_command, a Python list built at :225-235, so subprocess.run already runs with shell=False — that is the keyword's default for list argv. Adding it explicitly changes nothing at runtime.

Consistency: yes. The file's two other subprocess call sites already spell it out (:461 in the Popen at :453, :603 in the run at :594), so this makes the third site match the file's own convention. The test extension pins the kwarg (captured["kwargs"].get("shell") is False), which is the right shape for a convention pin.

Scope check: +1/-0 and +2/-0, exactly as described; no other files. Nothing to repair. This is a normal-path PR, not a bypass candidate — it should just go through review.

Acknowledged. The explicit shell=False is indeed a convention consistency enhancement and matches the behavior at runtime.