nhj

more

unified-ai-platform/node_modules/safer-buffer/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2018 Nikita Skovoroda <chalkerx@gmail.com>
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

unified-ai-platform/node_modules/safer-buffer/Porting-Buffer.md

@@ -0,0 +1,217 @@
+# Porting to the Buffer.from/Buffer.alloc API
+
+<a id="overview"></a>
+## Overview
+
+- [Variant 1: Drop support for Node.js ≤ 4.4.x and 5.0.0 — 5.9.x.](#variant-1) (*recommended*)
+- [Variant 2: Use a polyfill](#variant-2)
+- [Variant 3: manual detection, with safeguards](#variant-3)
+
+### Finding problematic bits of code using grep
+
+Just run `grep -nrE '[^a-zA-Z](Slow)?Buffer\s*\(' --exclude-dir node_modules`.
+
+It will find all the potentially unsafe places in your own code (with some considerably unlikely
+exceptions).
+
+### Finding problematic bits of code using Node.js 8
+
+If you’re using Node.js ≥ 8.0.0 (which is recommended), Node.js exposes multiple options that help with finding the relevant pieces of code:
+
+- `--trace-warnings` will make Node.js show a stack trace for this warning and other warnings that are printed by Node.js.
+- `--trace-deprecation` does the same thing, but only for deprecation warnings.
+- `--pending-deprecation` will show more types of deprecation warnings. In particular, it will show the `Buffer()` deprecation warning, even on Node.js 8.
+
+You can set these flags using an environment variable:
+
+```console
+$ export NODE_OPTIONS='--trace-warnings --pending-deprecation'
+$ cat example.js
+'use strict';
+const foo = new Buffer('foo');
+$ node example.js
+(node:7147) [DEP0005] DeprecationWarning: The Buffer() and new Buffer() constructors are not recommended for use due to security and usability concerns. Please use the new Buffer.alloc(), Buffer.allocUnsafe(), or Buffer.from() construction methods instead.
+    at showFlaggedDeprecation (buffer.js:127:13)
+    at new Buffer (buffer.js:148:3)
+    at Object.<anonymous> (/path/to/example.js:2:13)
+    [... more stack trace lines ...]
+```
+
+### Finding problematic bits of code using linters
+
+Eslint rules [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
+or
+[node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
+also find calls to deprecated `Buffer()` API. Those rules are included in some pre-sets.
+
+There is a drawback, though, that it doesn't always
+[work correctly](https://github.com/chalker/safer-buffer#why-not-safe-buffer) when `Buffer` is
+overriden e.g. with a polyfill, so recommended is a combination of this and some other method
+described above.
+
+<a id="variant-1"></a>
+## Variant 1: Drop support for Node.js ≤ 4.4.x and 5.0.0 — 5.9.x.
+
+This is the recommended solution nowadays that would imply only minimal overhead.
+
+The Node.js 5.x release line has been unsupported since July 2016, and the Node.js 4.x release line reaches its End of Life in April 2018 (→ [Schedule](https://github.com/nodejs/Release#release-schedule)). This means that these versions of Node.js will *not* receive any updates, even in case of security issues, so using these release lines should be avoided, if at all possible.
+
+What you would do in this case is to convert all `new Buffer()` or `Buffer()` calls to use `Buffer.alloc()` or `Buffer.from()`, in the following way:
+
+- For `new Buffer(number)`, replace it with `Buffer.alloc(number)`.
+- For `new Buffer(string)` (or `new Buffer(string, encoding)`), replace it with `Buffer.from(string)` (or `Buffer.from(string, encoding)`).
+- For all other combinations of arguments (these are much rarer), also replace `new Buffer(...arguments)` with `Buffer.from(...arguments)`.
+
+Note that `Buffer.alloc()` is also _faster_ on the current Node.js versions than
+`new Buffer(size).fill(0)`, which is what you would otherwise need to ensure zero-filling.
+
+Enabling eslint rule [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
+or
+[node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
+is recommended to avoid accidential unsafe Buffer API usage.
+
+There is also a [JSCodeshift codemod](https://github.com/joyeecheung/node-dep-codemod#dep005)
+for automatically migrating Buffer constructors to `Buffer.alloc()` or `Buffer.from()`.
+Note that it currently only works with cases where the arguments are literals or where the
+constructor is invoked with two arguments.
+
+_If you currently support those older Node.js versions and dropping them would be a semver-major change
+for you, or if you support older branches of your packages, consider using [Variant 2](#variant-2)
+or [Variant 3](#variant-3) on older branches, so people using those older branches will also receive
+the fix. That way, you will eradicate potential issues caused by unguarded Buffer API usage and
+your users will not observe a runtime deprecation warning when running your code on Node.js 10._
+
+<a id="variant-2"></a>
+## Variant 2: Use a polyfill
+
+Utilize [safer-buffer](https://www.npmjs.com/package/safer-buffer) as a polyfill to support older
+Node.js versions.
+
+You would take exacly the same steps as in [Variant 1](#variant-1), but with a polyfill
+`const Buffer = require('safer-buffer').Buffer` in all files where you use the new `Buffer` api.
+
+Make sure that you do not use old `new Buffer` API — in any files where the line above is added,
+using old `new Buffer()` API will _throw_. It will be easy to notice that in CI, though.
+
+Alternatively, you could use [buffer-from](https://www.npmjs.com/package/buffer-from) and/or
+[buffer-alloc](https://www.npmjs.com/package/buffer-alloc) [ponyfills](https://ponyfill.com/) —
+those are great, the only downsides being 4 deps in the tree and slightly more code changes to
+migrate off them (as you would be using e.g. `Buffer.from` under a different name). If you need only
+`Buffer.from` polyfilled — `buffer-from` alone which comes with no extra dependencies.
+
+_Alternatively, you could use [safe-buffer](https://www.npmjs.com/package/safe-buffer) — it also
+provides a polyfill, but takes a different approach which has
+[it's drawbacks](https://github.com/chalker/safer-buffer#why-not-safe-buffer). It will allow you
+to also use the older `new Buffer()` API in your code, though — but that's arguably a benefit, as
+it is problematic, can cause issues in your code, and will start emitting runtime deprecation
+warnings starting with Node.js 10._
+
+Note that in either case, it is important that you also remove all calls to the old Buffer
+API manually — just throwing in `safe-buffer` doesn't fix the problem by itself, it just provides
+a polyfill for the new API. I have seen people doing that mistake.
+
+Enabling eslint rule [no-buffer-constructor](https://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-buffer-constructor)
+or
+[node/no-deprecated-api](https://github.com/mysticatea/eslint-plugin-node/blob/master/docs/rules/no-deprecated-api.md)
+is recommended.
+
+_Don't forget to drop the polyfill usage once you drop support for Node.js < 4.5.0._
+
+<a id="variant-3"></a>
+## Variant 3 — manual detection, with safeguards
+
+This is useful if you create Buffer instances in only a few places (e.g. one), or you have your own
+wrapper around them.
+
+### Buffer(0)
+
+This special case for creating empty buffers can be safely replaced with `Buffer.concat([])`, which
+returns the same result all the way down to Node.js 0.8.x.
+
+### Buffer(notNumber)
+
+Before:
+
+```js
+var buf = new Buffer(notNumber, encoding);
+```
+
+After:
+
+```js
+var buf;
+if (Buffer.from && Buffer.from !== Uint8Array.from) {
+  buf = Buffer.from(notNumber, encoding);
+} else {
+  if (typeof notNumber === 'number')
+    throw new Error('The "size" argument must be of type number.');
+  buf = new Buffer(notNumber, encoding);
+}
+```
+
+`encoding` is optional.
+
+Note that the `typeof notNumber` before `new Buffer` is required (for cases when `notNumber` argument is not
+hard-coded) and _is not caused by the deprecation of Buffer constructor_ — it's exactly _why_ the
+Buffer constructor is deprecated. Ecosystem packages lacking this type-check caused numereous
+security issues — situations when unsanitized user input could end up in the `Buffer(arg)` create
+problems ranging from DoS to leaking sensitive information to the attacker from the process memory.
+
+When `notNumber` argument is hardcoded (e.g. literal `"abc"` or `[0,1,2]`), the `typeof` check can
+be omitted.
+
+Also note that using TypeScript does not fix this problem for you — when libs written in
+`TypeScript` are used from JS, or when user input ends up there — it behaves exactly as pure JS, as
+all type checks are translation-time only and are not present in the actual JS code which TS
+compiles to.
+
+### Buffer(number)
+
+For Node.js 0.10.x (and below) support:
+
+```js
+var buf;
+if (Buffer.alloc) {
+  buf = Buffer.alloc(number);
+} else {
+  buf = new Buffer(number);
+  buf.fill(0);
+}
+```
+
+Otherwise (Node.js ≥ 0.12.x):
+
+```js
+const buf = Buffer.alloc ? Buffer.alloc(number) : new Buffer(number).fill(0);
+```
+
+## Regarding Buffer.allocUnsafe
+
+Be extra cautious when using `Buffer.allocUnsafe`:
+ * Don't use it if you don't have a good reason to
+   * e.g. you probably won't ever see a performance difference for small buffers, in fact, those
+     might be even faster with `Buffer.alloc()`,
+   * if your code is not in the hot code path — you also probably won't notice a difference,
+   * keep in mind that zero-filling minimizes the potential risks.
+ * If you use it, make sure that you never return the buffer in a partially-filled state,
+   * if you are writing to it sequentially — always truncate it to the actuall written length
+
+Errors in handling buffers allocated with `Buffer.allocUnsafe` could result in various issues,
+ranged from undefined behaviour of your code to sensitive data (user input, passwords, certs)
+leaking to the remote attacker.
+
+_Note that the same applies to `new Buffer` usage without zero-filling, depending on the Node.js
+version (and lacking type checks also adds DoS to the list of potential problems)._
+
+<a id="faq"></a>
+## FAQ
+
+<a id="design-flaws"></a>
+### What is wrong with the `Buffer` constructor?
+
+The `Buffer` constructor could be used to create a buffer in many different ways:
+
+- `new Buffer(42)` creates a `Buffer` of 42 bytes. Before Node.js 8, this buffer contained
+  *arbitrary memory* for performance reasons, which could include anything ranging from
+  program source code to passwords and encryption keys.
+- `new Buffer('abc')` creates a 

unified-ai-platform/node_modules/safer-buffer/dangerous.js

@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+/* eslint-disable node/no-deprecated-api */
+
+'use strict'
+
+var buffer = require('buffer')
+var Buffer = buffer.Buffer
+var safer = require('./safer.js')
+var Safer = safer.Buffer
+
+var dangerous = {}
+
+var key
+
+for (key in safer) {
+  if (!safer.hasOwnProperty(key)) continue
+  dangerous[key] = safer[key]
+}
+
+var Dangereous = dangerous.Buffer = {}
+
+// Copy Safer API
+for (key in Safer) {
+  if (!Safer.hasOwnProperty(key)) continue
+  Dangereous[key] = Safer[key]
+}
+
+// Copy those missing unsafe methods, if they are present
+for (key in Buffer) {
+  if (!Buffer.hasOwnProperty(key)) continue
+  if (Dangereous.hasOwnProperty(key)) continue
+  Dangereous[key] = Buffer[key]
+}
+
+if (!Dangereous.allocUnsafe) {
+  Dangereous.allocUnsafe = function (size) {
+    if (typeof size !== 'number') {
+      throw new TypeError('The "size" argument must be of type number. Received type ' + typeof size)
+    }
+    if (size < 0 || size >= 2 * (1 << 30)) {
+      throw new RangeError('The value "' + size + '" is invalid for option "size"')
+    }
+    return Buffer(size)
+  }
+}
+
+if (!Dangereous.allocUnsafeSlow) {
+  Dangereous.allocUnsafeSlow = function (size) {
+    if (typeof size !== 'number') {
+      throw new TypeError('The "size" argument must be of type number. Received type ' + typeof size)
+    }
+    if (size < 0 || size >= 2 * (1 << 30)) {
+      throw new RangeError('The value "' + size + '" is invalid for option "size"')
+    }
+    return buffer.SlowBuffer(size)
+  }
+}
+
+module.exports = dangerous

unified-ai-platform/node_modules/safer-buffer/package.json

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+{
+  "name": "safer-buffer",
+  "version": "2.1.2",
+  "description": "Modern Buffer API polyfill without footguns",
+  "main": "safer.js",
+  "scripts": {
+    "browserify-test": "browserify --external tape tests.js > browserify-tests.js && tape browserify-tests.js",
+    "test": "standard && tape tests.js"
+  },
+  "author": {
+    "name": "Nikita Skovoroda",
+    "email": "chalkerx@gmail.com",
+    "url": "https://github.com/ChALkeR"
+  },
+  "license": "MIT",
+  "repository": {
+    "type": "git",
+    "url": "git+https://github.com/ChALkeR/safer-buffer.git"
+  },
+  "bugs": {
+    "url": "https://github.com/ChALkeR/safer-buffer/issues"
+  },
+  "devDependencies": {
+    "standard": "^11.0.1",
+    "tape": "^4.9.0"
+  },
+  "files": [
+    "Porting-Buffer.md",
+    "Readme.md",
+    "tests.js",
+    "dangerous.js",
+    "safer.js"
+  ]
+}