COR-1639: CLI-01: Scan Optimization (SHA Tracking) by leenk7991 · Pull Request #123 · Corgea/cli

leenk7991 · 2026-07-13T09:02:27Z

Summary

related doghouse PR

Opt-in --skip-if-scanned avoids re-scanning a commit that already has a completed same project/branch/SHA scan within 24h, and corgea list surfaces that SHA.

Approach: Use doghouse git_sha + ?sha= / ?branch= filters; skip only when opt-in and a recent complete match exists (exit 0). Default scan behavior unchanged.

src/utils/api.rs
- Add optional git_sha to ScanResponse (#[serde(default)])
- Extend query_scan_list with optional branch / sha query params
src/scanners/blast.rs
- Early skip check before packaging/upload
- Helpers: find_recent_matching_scan, parse_created_at, format_scan_age
- Unit tests for match / stale / future / branch-sha mismatch / incomplete
src/main.rs
- --skip-if-scanned flag (blast only; incompatible with --fail / --fail-on)
src/list.rs
- SHA column (first 8 chars); JSON includes git_sha via struct
src/wait.rs
- Call-site update for new query_scan_list params

Test plan

./harness check
Manual: skip on same commit after complete scan; scan without flag; list SHA / --json
Pair with doghouse PR that exposes git_sha + ?sha=

Before

After

run a scan for this commit

run again with flag --skip-if-scanned

running scan without flag, doesn't skip scan

after new commits, running with skip flag doesn't skpi

uncommited working tree

not a git repo

Reject skip with partial-scan/output flags, case-insensitive complete status, and satisfy clippy::question_mark on CI's Rust 1.97. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

Address RUSTSEC-2026-0194/0195 (quick-xml >=0.41) and RUSTSEC-2026-0204 (crossbeam-epoch >=0.9.20). Update Fortify parser for the quick-xml 0.41 API. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

Ibrahimrahhal

what is the use case here? as this can be confusing --skip-if-scanned may skip scanning because the user is working tree head is already scanned but he have uncommitted changes

leenk7991 · 2026-07-15T08:07:52Z

what is the use case here? as this can be confusing --skip-if-scanned may skip scanning because the user is working tree head is already scanned but he have uncommitted changes

yes that's expected, they mentioned they want to skip the scan if the commite was already scanned in the past 24 hours, maybe for CI reruns?

- API/CLI capability to retrieve the last n scans, including their commit SHAs.

- Based on what is returned we will check if it has been scanned. If scanned within the last 24 hours, skip the scan. - TransUnion - Pending

Keep --skip-if-scanned helpers/tests alongside COR-1647 fail-on malicious gates and COR-1576 wrapper/help UX updates from main. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

Ibrahimrahhal · 2026-07-20T09:32:49Z

+    if *skip_if_scanned {
+        match &repo_info {
+            None => {
+                println!("--skip-if-scanned: not a git repository; scanning normally.");


should throw an error, for example "this param can only be used with git repositories"

Ibrahimrahhal · 2026-07-20T09:33:05Z

+            }
+            Some(_) if utils::generic::is_working_tree_dirty("./") => {
+                println!(
+                    "--skip-if-scanned: working tree has uncommitted changes; scanning normally."


Ibrahimrahhal · 2026-07-20T09:38:01Z

yes that's expected, they mentioned they want to skip the scan if the commite was already scanned in the past 24 hours, maybe for CI reruns?

Not sure, still looks not complete use case to me, for example we need to know how we should handle blocking rules. if they had a pipeline that was blocked on a day it will pass the next day if they enabled this flag. (it might not be needed but we need to understand more on how they intend to use it)

…racking

COR-1639: CLI-01: Scan Optimization (SHA Tracking)

1c0f266

leenk7991 requested review from Ibrahimrahhal, asadeddin, juangaitanv, tabualhsan and yhoztak July 13, 2026 09:03

cursor Bot reviewed Jul 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/main.rs Outdated

Comment thread src/scanners/blast.rs Outdated

leenk7991 and others added 2 commits July 13, 2026 12:31

Address PR review: tighten skip-if-scanned guards and fix CI clippy

343bffe

Reject skip with partial-scan/output flags, case-insensitive complete status, and satisfy clippy::question_mark on CI's Rust 1.97. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

Fix cargo audit: bump quick-xml and crossbeam-epoch

69b4022

Address RUSTSEC-2026-0194/0195 (quick-xml >=0.41) and RUSTSEC-2026-0204 (crossbeam-epoch >=0.9.20). Update Fortify parser for the quick-xml 0.41 API. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

leenk7991 mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2026

COR-1641: CLI-02: Scan-Level Metadata Tagging #124

Open

Ibrahimrahhal reviewed Jul 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

leenk7991 requested a review from Ibrahimrahhal July 15, 2026 14:31

Merge main into cor-1639-scan-sha-tracking

5b32e6a

Keep --skip-if-scanned helpers/tests alongside COR-1647 fail-on malicious gates and COR-1576 wrapper/help UX updates from main. Co-authored-by: Cursor <[email protected]>

juangaitanv reviewed Jul 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/scanners/blast.rs

Comment thread src/scanners/blast.rs Outdated

Comment thread src/scanners/blast.rs

COR-1639: address comments and other updates

84b4e3d

leenk7991 requested a review from juangaitanv July 19, 2026 07:57

Ibrahimrahhal reviewed Jul 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

leenk7991 added 2 commits July 20, 2026 16:53

Merge branch 'main' of github.com:Corgea/cli into cor-1639-scan-sha-t…

0aeab7d

…racking

COR-1639: log error instead of print

016e6d1

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

COR-1639: CLI-01: Scan Optimization (SHA Tracking)#123

COR-1639: CLI-01: Scan Optimization (SHA Tracking)#123
leenk7991 wants to merge 7 commits into
mainfrom
cor-1639-scan-sha-tracking

leenk7991 commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal left a comment

Uh oh!

leenk7991 commented Jul 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal Jul 20, 2026

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal commented Jul 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

leenk7991 commented Jul 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Test plan

Before

After

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

leenk7991 commented Jul 15, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal Jul 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Ibrahimrahhal commented Jul 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

leenk7991 commented Jul 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Ibrahimrahhal commented Jul 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading