[Cloud Security] 198669 add support for multiple CVEs and improve vulnerability data grid, flyout and contextual flyout UI #213039

alexreal1314 · 2025-03-04T08:28:25Z

Summary

Purpose of this PR is to update UI components which display vulnerabilities in order to support 3rd party integrations and in particularly Qualys, changes include:

New column in Default view in table- "Vulnerability Title"
Renaming "Vulnerability" column to "CVE ID"
Introducing "Title" (Vulnerability Title) and "Subtitle" (CVE ID) in vulnerability flyout while also supporting multiple CVEs.
Update severity handling to be case insensitive across relevant components - data grid, flyout, contextual flyout and insights tab data grid.

Checklist

Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout

Add new column with header 'Vulnerability Title' and the underlying field should be 'vulnerability.title' field.
change existing column with header 'Vulnerability' to 'CVE ID' and underlying field should be 'vulnerability.id'.
aggregation query when grouping by CVE should fetch severities to be case-insensitive - since 3rd party integrations can introduce severities not in UPPER CASE.
Components related to vulnerability severity handle supported severity levels disregarding the case - vulnerabilities flyout and contextual flyout, data grid and insights tab data table.
Multiple CVEs under vulnerability.id is a supported case in Vulnerability Findings in Kibana.
missing vulnerability.id is handled gracefully in the UI - data grid
missing vulnerability.id is handled gracefully in the UI - flyout

Insights tab data grid and contextual Flyout

Add new column with header 'Vulnerability Title' and the underlying field should be 'vulnerability.title' field.
change existing column with header 'Vulnerability' to 'CVE ID' and underlying field should be 'vulnerability.id'.
fix redirect link when clicking on a vulnerabilty row that redirect to the vulnerabilities tab - make sure search params and filters are working with vulnerability.id array of strings.
contextual flyout should support severities maps to be case insensitive.
Unit or functional tests were updated or added to match the most common scenarios
Flaky Test Runner was used on any tests changed
The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct release_note:* label is applied per the guidelines

The following topics will be merged as part of another PR

Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout

arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the flyout
arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the data grid.

Insights tab data grid and contextual Flyout

arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the contextual flyout
arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the insights tab data grid.
Vulnerabilities data grid grouping

Grouping by multi-value fields

grouping by CVE should be handled properly in the UI.
each field which might have multiple values - package.name, package.fixed_version and package.version should be flattened by each value separately so user have the max value and can group by each value.

Identify risks

The UI changes in this PR address new integrations which has different structure to vulnerability fields which might cause UI bugs. Tests were modified and added to mitigate the risk of encountering issues.

Screenshots

Grouping before fix by multiple values

Flatten by each value

kibanamachine · 2025-03-10T13:15:29Z

Cloud deployment initiated, see credentials at: https://buildkite.com/elastic/kibana-deploy-cloud-from-pr/builds/102

elasticmachine · 2025-03-11T15:47:42Z

Pinging @elastic/kibana-cloud-security-posture (Team:Cloud Security)

JordanSh

added some comments for now, still need to continue the review but i think some changes you can already start working on. I'm also adding paulo and max as reviewers since paulo is most the experienced with the table and max has the most knowledge with 3Ps

x-pack/platform/packages/shared/kbn-cloud-security-posture/common/types/vulnerabilities.ts

JordanSh · 2025-03-13T13:13:03Z

...ons/security/packages/kbn-cloud-security-posture/public/src/utils/get_normalized_severity.ts

+const isVulnSeverity = (severity: string): severity is VulnSeverity =>
+  VALID_SEVERITIES.includes(severity as VulnSeverity);
+
+export const getNormalizedSeverity = (severity?: string): VulnSeverity => {
+  if (!severity) {
+    return 'UNKNOWN';
+  }
+
+  return (
+    isVulnSeverity(severity.toUpperCase()) ? severity.toUpperCase() : 'UNKNOWN'
+  ) as VulnSeverity;
+};


I think you can remove the casting by doing this:

const isVulnSeverity = (severity: string): severity is VulnSeverity => VALID_SEVERITIES.some(validSeverity => validSeverity === severity);

regarding

if (!severity) { return 'UNKNOWN'; }

are we sure we want to flag missing data is UKNOWN? maybe it should be left blank?

the casting at the end pretty much negates the entire process that we are doing, I'm suggesting some changes:

const upperCaseSeverity = severity.toUpperCase(); if (isVulnSeverity(upperCaseSeverity)) { return upperCaseSeverity; } return 'UNKNOWN';

regarding the return 'UNKNOWN'; at the end. since we meant to be agnostic to the data, maybe we want to support 3P types of severities? changing customer's severity types to something else might cause them problems. should verify with product.

@smriti0321 @tinnytintin10 @nick-alayil, can one of you please confirm point 2 and 4?

@JordanSh For #2 Yes "Unknown" severity is recognised category in vulnerability detection space. We should ideally show Severity- Unknown and not leave it blank like other fields. For #4 I am not very clear about ask, overall we should not assign "UNKNOWN" severity on our side if source is not providing this value.

Thanks @smriti0321!
So just to summarize
We only assign severity UNKNOWN if the actual value is indeed "UNKNOWN", or if the severity value is undefined. For any other case we either assign our default values or any other value that the 3P has saved in this field.

TL;DR: We should enumerate 3P data as-is. We can make UI/UX adjustments for proper display, but no data transformations.

Thanks for the discussion everyone. Let me clarify a few points:

are we sure we want to flag missing data is UKNOWN? maybe it should be left blank?

I agree we should leave it blank. Here's why:

Our primary goal is to enumerate 3P vuln findings data without enrichment at this stage. Making enrichment decisions now could create inconsistencies with future 3P data sources.

UNKNOWN is actually a legitimate severity value that some tools output explicitly. We shouldn't override or assign it when the original source doesn't provide this value.

changing customer's severity types to something else might cause them problems.

Completely agree here. 👍

It's worth noting this code was originally built for CNVM specific use cases, where we made certain adjustments to handle missing data for better table presentation. Now that we're expanding to enumerate all 3P vuln data in the findings page, we should maintain the original 3P data integrity.

@alexreal1314 since we will need to support empty severity and other random values, we will also need to address it in the UI. we will need to verify we can still group search and display it in the flyout

@nick-alayil @smriti0321 @JordanSh thanks for the inputs.
just to make sure with some examples regarding severity:

low/medium/high/critical/unknown -> in any case we convert to upper case so we can use our colors for marking severities.

missing severity field/any other value -> stays the same.

do we want to display it like that in the data grid? also need to think what to show in the flyout.

low/medium/high/critical/unknown -> in any case we convert to upper case so we can use our colors for marking severities.

Yes, that sounds good 👍

missing severity field/any other value -> stays the same.

Correct.

do we want to display it like that in the data grid?

Yes please.

also need to think what to show in the flyout.

If there is no severity, we don't need to display anything as shown in your 2nd flyout screenshot.

x-pack/solutions/security/packages/kbn-cloud-security-posture/public/src/utils/query_utils.ts

JordanSh · 2025-03-13T13:24:27Z

...d_security_posture/public/components/cloud_security_data_table/cloud_security_data_table.tsx

@@ -161,6 +161,25 @@ export const CloudSecurityDataTable = ({
    };
  }, [persistedSettings, columnHeaders]);

+  // This is a mapper that adds vulnerability.id field as an empty string - needed for the flyout to open
+  const rowsWithVulnerabilityId = useMemo(


can this be done on the flyout level instead? i dont think we should run over all the items in the table. we can just have a default value for the id when the flyout is opening

@JordanSh the issue is that the flyout doesn't open at all if 'vulnerability.id' key is missing.

thats what im suggesting to change. lets make the flyout be able to open even without vuln id. thats what happening anyway. we just need to remove this condition from the flyout rather than add empty ids to all items (which is also data manipulation which we want to avoid as much as possible)

note that will change will require us to add tests for this scenario, make sure nothing breaks in the flyout without vuln id

@JordanSh in that case what should be the check instead of this one?
const isCspVulnerabilityFinding = ( source: Record<string, any> | undefined ): source is CspVulnerabilityFinding => { return source?.vulnerability?.id !== undefined; };

do we want some kind of other check maybe based on vendor? or we allow to open the flyout from any type of vulnerability?

waiting for a decision on how should we check if we should open the vulnerability flyout - based on observer.vendor field or another field.

seanrathier

Looks good! I left a few comments.

x-pack/platform/packages/shared/kbn-cloud-security-posture/common/index.ts

x-pack/solutions/security/packages/kbn-cloud-security-posture/public/index.ts

x-pack/solutions/security/packages/kbn-cloud-security-posture/public/src/utils/hooks_utils.ts

seanrathier · 2025-03-17T20:55:45Z

...d_security_posture/public/components/cloud_security_data_table/cloud_security_data_table.tsx

@@ -161,6 +161,25 @@ export const CloudSecurityDataTable = ({
    };
  }, [persistedSettings, columnHeaders]);

+  // This is a mapper that adds vulnerability.id field as an empty string - needed for the flyout to open
+  const rowsWithVulnerabilityId = useMemo(


...urity_posture/public/pages/vulnerabilities/utils/create_detection_rule_from_vulnerability.ts

...olutions/security/plugins/cloud_security_posture/public/pages/vulnerabilities/utils/index.ts

seanrathier

Approving my concerns, thanks for making the changes. 👍

…out not opening

…tagrid and flyout

…ability to CVE ID column header

update flyout overview tab to support multiple cves, published date move to be above alerts section

…it tests

…alues update insights tab vulnerabilities column names fix redirect from insights tab to vulnerabilties findings page

…tle cell render

…unctions

…StatusBadge

…lues

elasticmachine · 2025-03-25T14:06:11Z

💛 Build succeeded, but was flaky

Failed CI Steps

Test Failures

[job] [logs] FTR Configs #65 / EQL execution logic API @ess @serverless @serverlessQA EQL type rules parses shard failures for EQL event query
[job] [logs] Investigations - Security Solution Cypress Tests #3 / KPI visualizations in Alerts Page Histogram legend hover actions should should add a filter in to KQL bar should should add a filter in to KQL bar

Metrics [docs]

Module Count

Fewer modules leads to a faster build time

id	before	after	diff
`cloudSecurityPosture`	683	687	+4
`securitySolution`	7095	7096	+1
total			+5

Public APIs missing comments

Total count of every public API that lacks a comment. Target amount is 0. Run node scripts/build_api_docs --plugin [yourplugin] --stats comments for more detailed information.

id	before	after	diff
`@kbn/cloud-security-posture`	97	99	+2

Async chunks

Total size of all lazy-loaded chunks that will be downloaded as the user navigates the app

id	before	after	diff
`cloudSecurityPosture`	488.8KB	493.7KB	+4.9KB
`securitySolution`	8.9MB	8.9MB	+655.0B
total			+5.5KB

Unknown metric groups

API count

id	before	after	diff
`@kbn/cloud-security-posture`	97	99	+2

History

💚 Build #286893 succeeded 236cfa7
💛 Build #286354 was flaky 712fc14
💚 Build #285827 succeeded 1577ac8
💚 Build #285732 succeeded a141032

…nerability data grid, flyout and contextual flyout UI (elastic#213039) ## Summary Purpose of this PR is to update UI components which display vulnerabilities in order to support 3rd party integrations and in particularly Qualys, changes include: - New column in Default view in table- "Vulnerability Title" - Renaming "Vulnerability" column to "CVE ID" - Introducing "Title" (Vulnerability Title) and "Subtitle" (CVE ID) in vulnerability flyout while also supporting multiple CVEs. - Update severity handling to be case insensitive across relevant components - data grid, flyout, contextual flyout and insights tab data grid. ### Checklist **Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout** - [x] Add new column with header 'Vulnerability Title' and the underlying field should be 'vulnerability.title' field. - [x] change existing column with header 'Vulnerability' to 'CVE ID' and underlying field should be 'vulnerability.id'. - [x] aggregation query when grouping by CVE should fetch severities to be case-insensitive - since 3rd party integrations can introduce severities not in UPPER CASE. - [x] Components related to vulnerability severity handle supported severity levels disregarding the case - vulnerabilities flyout and contextual flyout, data grid and insights tab data table. - [x] Multiple CVEs under `vulnerability.id` is a supported case in Vulnerability Findings in Kibana. - [x] missing `vulnerability.id` is handled gracefully in the UI - data grid - [x] missing `vulnerability.id` is handled gracefully in the UI - flyout **Insights tab data grid and contextual Flyout** - [x] Add new column with header 'Vulnerability Title' and the underlying field should be 'vulnerability.title' field. - [x] change existing column with header 'Vulnerability' to 'CVE ID' and underlying field should be 'vulnerability.id'. - [x] fix redirect link when clicking on a vulnerabilty row that redirect to the vulnerabilities tab - make sure search params and filters are working with vulnerability.id array of strings. - [x] contextual flyout should support severities maps to be case insensitive. - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [x] [Flaky Test Runner](https://ci-stats.kibana.dev/trigger_flaky_test_runner/1) was used on any tests changed - [x] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct `release_note:*` label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) **The following topics will be merged as part of another PR** ### Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout - arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the flyout - arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the data grid. ### Insights tab data grid and contextual Flyout - arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the contextual flyout - arrays in package-related vulnerability fields are rendered correctly in the insights tab data grid. **Vulnerabilities data grid grouping** ### Grouping by multi-value fields - grouping by CVE should be handled properly in the UI. - each field which might have multiple values - package.name, package.fixed_version and package.version should be flattened by each value separately so user have the max value and can group by each value. ### Identify risks The UI changes in this PR address new integrations which has different structure to vulnerability fields which might cause UI bugs. Tests were modified and added to mitigate the risk of encountering issues. ### Screenshots ![Screenshot 2025-03-10 at 16 04 25](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8da0974e-dfb3-4aa7-a40f-daaeae53d8f5) ![Screenshot 2025-03-10 at 16 07 04](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5d079075-3774-46a1-9098-6e437fbd8e1e) ![Screenshot 2025-03-10 at 16 07 32](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5f68bebc-f532-4647-9671-40f41c4b039b) ![Screenshot 2025-03-10 at 16 04 40](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8bcba728-f513-434c-b764-5995737216d7) Grouping before fix by multiple values ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/21756172-819c-4836-ba3a-79ae9ed6cbad) Flatten by each value ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d329d3f7-b499-4abb-8e40-6c8580be9202)

## Summary Purpose of this PR is to handle grouping of multi-value fields which are introduced by Qualys VDMR integrations. This PR adds the capability to flatten grouping results of the following fields - vulnerability.id, package.name, package.version and package.fixed_version, which are all ECS fields. It continues the changes of this [PR](#213039). ### Checklist **The following topics will be merged as part of another PR** ### Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout - [x] grouping by CVE should be handled properly in the UI. - [x] multi value fields are flattened - each value is counted as separate group key. - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [x] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct release_note:* label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) ### Screenshots Grouping before fix by multiple values ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/21756172-819c-4836-ba3a-79ae9ed6cbad) Flatten by each value ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d329d3f7-b499-4abb-8e40-6c8580be9202)

…1302) ## Summary This PR backports changes related to Qualys VMDR added integration support that were merged to version 9.1.0. PRs backported: - #213039 - #216411 ### Identify risks Thorough sanity check need to be made before merging since a lot of conflicts were fixed manually. --------- Co-authored-by: kibanamachine <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Maxim Kholod <[email protected]>

## Summary Purpose of this PR is to handle grouping of multi-value fields which are introduced by Qualys VDMR integrations. This PR adds the capability to flatten grouping results of the following fields - vulnerability.id, package.name, package.version and package.fixed_version, which are all ECS fields. It continues the changes of this [PR](elastic#213039). ### Checklist **The following topics will be merged as part of another PR** ### Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout - [x] grouping by CVE should be handled properly in the UI. - [x] multi value fields are flattened - each value is counted as separate group key. - [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios - [x] The PR description includes the appropriate Release Notes section, and the correct release_note:* label is applied per the [guidelines](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/contributing.html#kibana-release-notes-process) ### Screenshots Grouping before fix by multiple values ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/21756172-819c-4836-ba3a-79ae9ed6cbad) Flatten by each value ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d329d3f7-b499-4abb-8e40-6c8580be9202) (cherry picked from commit 1b9bf80) # Conflicts: # src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-grouping/src/components/grouping.tsx # src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-grouping/src/containers/query/index.test.ts # src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-grouping/src/containers/query/index.ts # src/platform/packages/shared/kbn-grouping/src/containers/query/types.ts

alexreal1314 linked an issue Mar 4, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request

Handle missing vulnerability.id gracefully #198669

Closed

2 tasks

alexreal1314 force-pushed the 198669-handle-vulnerabilityid-flyout branch 4 times, most recently from fcc5d86 to adf8c30 Compare March 9, 2025 08:20

alexreal1314 added Team:Cloud Security Cloud Security team related release_note:feature Makes this part of the condensed release notes ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment backport:skip This commit does not require backporting labels Mar 9, 2025

alexreal1314 changed the title ~~198669 handle vulnerabilityid flyout~~ [Cloud Security] 198669 handle vulnerabilityid flyout Mar 10, 2025

alexreal1314 added release_note:enhancement and removed release_note:feature Makes this part of the condensed release notes labels Mar 11, 2025

alexreal1314 changed the title ~~[Cloud Security] 198669 handle vulnerabilityid flyout~~ [Cloud Security] 198669 add support for multiple CVEs and improve vulnerability data grid, flyout and contextual flyout UI Mar 11, 2025

alexreal1314 marked this pull request as ready for review March 11, 2025 15:47

alexreal1314 requested a review from a team as a code owner March 11, 2025 15:47

JordanSh reviewed Mar 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

JordanSh requested review from maxcold and opauloh March 13, 2025 13:27

seanrathier reviewed Mar 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

alexreal1314 requested a review from a team as a code owner March 18, 2025 10:41

alexreal1314 force-pushed the 198669-handle-vulnerabilityid-flyout branch 3 times, most recently from d2452af to 3f3bfc2 Compare March 18, 2025 14:30

seanrathier approved these changes Mar 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

alexreal1314 added ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment ci:cloud-redeploy Always create a new Cloud deployment and removed ci:cloud-deploy Create or update a Cloud deployment ci:cloud-redeploy Always create a new Cloud deployment labels Mar 18, 2025

alexreal1314 added 11 commits March 23, 2025 10:01

add handling of missing vulnerability.id in the data grid and fix fly…

39aa3b3

…out not opening

add handling of severity to be case insensitive in vulnerabilities da…

e14dfe2

…tagrid and flyout

update vulnerabilities data grid - add title column and rename Vulner…

742149c

…ability to CVE ID column header

add support for multiple cve in the flyout header

6bbcca3

update flyout overview tab to support multiple cves, published date move to be above alerts section

fix i18n translation files and create util function

e9f4fa7

fix vulnerabilities serverity flyout display, add test ids and fix un…

e135d21

…it tests

add normalizeSeverity function unit tests

bce3fcb

fix check types errors

6fb58b1

update contextual flyout severity mapping to handle inensitive case v…

7cf0582

…alues update insights tab vulnerabilities column names fix redirect from insights tab to vulnerabilties findings page

fix conflicts and update insights tab vulnerabilities table id and ti…

acbf9b0

…tle cell render

add unit tests to composeQueryFilters and normalizeSeverity utility f…

df653ab

…unctions

alexreal1314 force-pushed the 198669-handle-vulnerabilityid-flyout branch 2 times, most recently from 712fc14 to 236cfa7 Compare March 25, 2025 11:09

alexreal1314 added 2 commits March 25, 2025 14:51

fix barrel imports and fix types of utility function used by Severity…

bda808b

…StatusBadge

fix finding matching refernce in case of multiple vulnerability.id va…

32694ed

…lues

alexreal1314 force-pushed the 198669-handle-vulnerabilityid-flyout branch from 236cfa7 to 32694ed Compare March 25, 2025 13:21

alexreal1314 mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2025

[Discuss] severity values inconsistency in 3rd party integrations #215873

Open

2 tasks

alexreal1314 removed the request for review from a team March 25, 2025 13:49

alexreal1314 merged commit c7e829e into main Mar 25, 2025
9 checks passed

alexreal1314 deleted the 198669-handle-vulnerabilityid-flyout branch March 25, 2025 15:23

kibanamachine added the v9.1.0 label Mar 25, 2025

alexreal1314 mentioned this pull request Mar 25, 2025

[Cloud Security] handle grouping in multi value fields #215913

Merged

4 tasks

alexreal1314 mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2025

add support for multi value vulnerability id and package fields in vu… animehart/kibana#5

Merged

This was referenced May 22, 2025

[Cloud Security] backport Qualys related changes to 8.19 #221247

Closed

[Cloud Security] Backport 221247 backport qualys related changes #221302

Merged

[Cloud Security] 198669 add support for multiple CVEs and improve vulnerability data grid, flyout and contextual flyout UI #213039

[Cloud Security] 198669 add support for multiple CVEs and improve vulnerability data grid, flyout and contextual flyout UI #213039

Uh oh!

Conversation

alexreal1314 commented Mar 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Checklist

Vulnerabilities data grid and Flyout

Insights tab data grid and contextual Flyout

Grouping by multi-value fields

Identify risks

Screenshots

Uh oh!

kibanamachine commented Mar 10, 2025

Uh oh!

elasticmachine commented Mar 11, 2025

Uh oh!

JordanSh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JordanSh Mar 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexreal1314 Mar 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JordanSh Mar 16, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

seanrathier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

seanrathier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

elasticmachine commented Mar 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

💛 Build succeeded, but was flaky

Failed CI Steps

Test Failures

Metrics [docs]

Module Count

Public APIs missing comments

Async chunks

API count

History

Uh oh!

alexreal1314 commented Mar 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

JordanSh Mar 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

alexreal1314 Mar 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

JordanSh Mar 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading

elasticmachine commented Mar 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading