Lib.rs

› BitFlags › Reviews

These reviews are from cargo-vet. To add your review, set up cargo-vet and submit your URL to its registry.

The current version of BitFlags is 2.6.0.

2.4.2 (older version) safe-to-deploy, does-not-implement-crypto, ub-risk-1

From google/supply-chain copy of chromium. By Lukasz Anforowicz.

Audit notes:

  • I've checked for any discussion in Google-internal cl/546819168 (where audit of version 2.3.3 happened)
  • src/lib.rs contains #![cfg_attr(not(test), forbid(unsafe_code))]
  • There are 2 cases of unsafe in src/external.rs but they seem to be correct in a straightforward way - they just propagate the marker trait's impl (e.g. impl bytemuck::Pod) from the inner to the outer type
  • Additional discussion and/or notes may be found in https://crrev.com/c/5238056

2.2.1 — diff review from 2.1.0 only (older version) safe-to-deploy

From bytecodealliance/wasmtime. By Jamey Sharp.

This version adds unsafe impls of traits from the bytemuck crate when built with that library enabled, but I believe the impls satisfy the documented safety requirements for bytemuck. The other changes are minor.

cargo-vet does not verify reviewers' identity. You have to fully trust the source the audits are from.

safe-to-deploy (implies safe-to-run)

This crate will not introduce a serious security vulnerability to production software exposed to untrusted input. More…

safe-to-run

This crate can be compiled, run, and tested on a local workstation or in controlled automation without surprising consequences. More…

does-not-implement-crypto (implies crypto-safe)

Inspection reveals that the crate in question does not attempt to implement any cryptographic algorithms on its own.

Note that certification of this does not require an expert on all forms of cryptography: it's expected for crates we import to be "good enough" citizens, so they'll at least be forthcoming if they try to implement something cryptographic. When in doubt, please ask an expert.

crypto-safe

All crypto algorithms in this crate have been reviewed by a relevant expert.

Note: If a crate does not implement crypto, use does-not-implement-crypto, which implies crypto-safe, but does not require expert review in order to audit for.

ub-risk-1 (implies ub-risk-2)

Excellent soundness.

Full description of the audit criteria can be found at https://github.com/google/rust-crate-audits/blob/main/auditing_standards.md#ub-risk-1

ub-risk-2 (implies ub-risk-3)

Negligible unsoundness or average soundness.

Full description of the audit criteria can be found at https://github.com/google/rust-crate-audits/blob/main/auditing_standards.md#ub-risk-2

ub-risk-3 (implies ub-risk-4)
Implied by other criteria

Mild unsoundness or suboptimal soundness.

Full description of the audit criteria can be found at https://github.com/google/rust-crate-audits/blob/main/auditing_standards.md#ub-risk-3

ub-risk-4
Implied by other criteria

Extreme unsoundness.

Full description of the audit criteria can be found at https://github.com/google/rust-crate-audits/blob/main/auditing_standards.md#ub-risk-4

unknown

May have been packaged automatically without a review

These reviews are from Crev, a distributed system for code reviews. To add your review, set up cargo-crev.

The current version of BitFlags is 2.6.0.

2.4.2 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Low Understanding: Medium

by weiznich on 2024-02-29

Review update from 2.4.1 to 2.4.2

  • Update macro rules based code to not relay on local_inner_macros
  • Add many tests

1.3.2 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Low Understanding: Medium

by leo60228 on 2021-09-28

simple macro

1.3.2 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Medium Understanding: Medium

by Minoru on 2021-08-16

There's only one meaningful change since 1.3.1: non-snake-case names are allowed in generated structs. My previous review stands.

1.3.1 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Medium Understanding: Medium

by Minoru on 2021-08-13

Show review…

bitflags is a set of macros. They all look clean and correct. I flipped through the tests too, and although I didn't pay as much attention, they too look good — there are certainly more of them than of macros themselves, so I'm quite confident about them. The docs are good too.

1.2.1 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Low Understanding: Medium

Approved without comment by inflation on 2021-11-08

1.2.1 (older version) Rating: Positive Thoroughness: Low Understanding: Medium

by andrewaylett on 2021-04-17

Line ending fixes and a new function

1.1.0 (older version) Rating: Strong Positive Thoroughness: Low Understanding: High

Approved without comment by Mark-Simulacrum on 2019-06-24

Lib.rs has been able to verify that all files in the crate's tarball, except Cargo.lock, are in the crate's repository with a git tag matching the version. Please note that this check is still in beta, and absence of this confirmation does not mean that the files don't match.

Crates in the crates.io registry are tarball snapshots uploaded by crates' publishers. The registry is not using crates' git repositories, so there is a possibility that published crates have a misleading repository URL, or contain different code from the code in the repository.

To review the actual code of the crate, it's best to use cargo crev open bitflags. Alternatively, you can download the tarball of bitflags v2.6.0 or view the source online.