This project does not seem to handle request data directly as such no vulnerable execution paths were found.
include
, or for example
via PHP's auto-loading mechanism.
These results are based on our legacy PHP analysis, consider migrating to our new PHP analysis engine instead. Learn more
1 | <?php |
||
2 | |||
3 | namespace Kunstmaan\RedirectBundle\Controller; |
||
4 | |||
5 | use Kunstmaan\AdminListBundle\AdminList\Configurator\AdminListConfiguratorInterface; |
||
6 | use Kunstmaan\AdminListBundle\Controller\AdminListController; |
||
7 | use Kunstmaan\RedirectBundle\AdminList\RedirectAdminListConfigurator; |
||
8 | use Symfony\Component\Routing\Annotation\Route; |
||
9 | use Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\Request; |
||
10 | use Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\Response; |
||
11 | |||
12 | class RedirectAdminListController extends AdminListController |
||
13 | { |
||
14 | /** |
||
15 | * @var AdminListConfiguratorInterface |
||
16 | */ |
||
17 | private $configurator; |
||
18 | |||
19 | /** |
||
20 | * @return AdminListConfiguratorInterface |
||
21 | */ |
||
22 | public function getAdminListConfigurator() |
||
23 | { |
||
24 | if (!isset($this->configurator)) { |
||
25 | $this->configurator = new RedirectAdminListConfigurator($this->getEntityManager(), null, $this->container->get('kunstmaan_admin.domain_configuration')); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
|
|||
26 | } |
||
27 | |||
28 | return $this->configurator; |
||
29 | } |
||
30 | |||
31 | /** |
||
32 | * The index action |
||
33 | * |
||
34 | * @Route("/", name="kunstmaanredirectbundle_admin_redirect") |
||
35 | */ |
||
36 | public function indexAction(Request $request) |
||
37 | { |
||
38 | return parent::doIndexAction($this->getAdminListConfigurator(), $request); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
$this->getAdminListConfigurator() of type object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tConfiguratorInterface> is not a sub-type of object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tAdminListConfigurator> . It seems like you assume a concrete implementation of the interface Kunstmaan\AdminListBundl...stConfiguratorInterface to be always present.
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass. Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.
Loading history...
It seems like you call parent on a different method (
doIndexAction() instead of indexAction() ). Are you sure this is correct? If so, you might want to change this to $this->doIndexAction() .
This check looks for a call to a parent method whose name is different than the method from which it is called. Consider the following code: class Daddy
{
protected function getFirstName()
{
return "Eidur";
}
protected function getSurName()
{
return "Gudjohnsen";
}
}
class Son
{
public function getFirstName()
{
return parent::getSurname();
}
}
The
Loading history...
|
|||
39 | } |
||
40 | |||
41 | /** |
||
42 | * The add action |
||
43 | * |
||
44 | * @Route("/add", name="kunstmaanredirectbundle_admin_redirect_add", methods={"GET", "POST"}) |
||
45 | * |
||
46 | * @return Response |
||
47 | */ |
||
48 | public function addAction(Request $request) |
||
49 | { |
||
50 | return parent::doAddAction($this->getAdminListConfigurator(), null, $request); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
$this->getAdminListConfigurator() of type object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tConfiguratorInterface> is not a sub-type of object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tAdminListConfigurator> . It seems like you assume a concrete implementation of the interface Kunstmaan\AdminListBundl...stConfiguratorInterface to be always present.
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass. Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.
Loading history...
It seems like you call parent on a different method (
doAddAction() instead of addAction() ). Are you sure this is correct? If so, you might want to change this to $this->doAddAction() .
This check looks for a call to a parent method whose name is different than the method from which it is called. Consider the following code: class Daddy
{
protected function getFirstName()
{
return "Eidur";
}
protected function getSurName()
{
return "Gudjohnsen";
}
}
class Son
{
public function getFirstName()
{
return parent::getSurname();
}
}
The
Loading history...
|
|||
51 | } |
||
52 | |||
53 | /** |
||
54 | * The edit action |
||
55 | * |
||
56 | * @param int $id |
||
57 | * |
||
58 | * @Route("/{id}", requirements={"id" = "\d+"}, name="kunstmaanredirectbundle_admin_redirect_edit", methods={"GET", "POST"}) |
||
59 | * |
||
60 | * @return Response |
||
61 | */ |
||
62 | public function editAction(Request $request, $id) |
||
63 | { |
||
64 | return parent::doEditAction($this->getAdminListConfigurator(), $id, $request); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
$this->getAdminListConfigurator() of type object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tConfiguratorInterface> is not a sub-type of object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tAdminListConfigurator> . It seems like you assume a concrete implementation of the interface Kunstmaan\AdminListBundl...stConfiguratorInterface to be always present.
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass. Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.
Loading history...
It seems like you call parent on a different method (
doEditAction() instead of editAction() ). Are you sure this is correct? If so, you might want to change this to $this->doEditAction() .
This check looks for a call to a parent method whose name is different than the method from which it is called. Consider the following code: class Daddy
{
protected function getFirstName()
{
return "Eidur";
}
protected function getSurName()
{
return "Gudjohnsen";
}
}
class Son
{
public function getFirstName()
{
return parent::getSurname();
}
}
The
Loading history...
|
|||
65 | } |
||
66 | |||
67 | /** |
||
68 | * The delete action |
||
69 | * |
||
70 | * @param int $id |
||
71 | * |
||
72 | * @Route("/{id}/delete", requirements={"id" = "\d+"}, name="kunstmaanredirectbundle_admin_redirect_delete", methods={"GET", "POST"}) |
||
73 | * |
||
74 | * @return Response |
||
75 | */ |
||
76 | public function deleteAction(Request $request, $id) |
||
77 | { |
||
78 | return parent::doDeleteAction($this->getAdminListConfigurator(), $id, $request); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
$this->getAdminListConfigurator() of type object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tConfiguratorInterface> is not a sub-type of object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tAdminListConfigurator> . It seems like you assume a concrete implementation of the interface Kunstmaan\AdminListBundl...stConfiguratorInterface to be always present.
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass. Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.
Loading history...
It seems like you call parent on a different method (
doDeleteAction() instead of deleteAction() ). Are you sure this is correct? If so, you might want to change this to $this->doDeleteAction() .
This check looks for a call to a parent method whose name is different than the method from which it is called. Consider the following code: class Daddy
{
protected function getFirstName()
{
return "Eidur";
}
protected function getSurName()
{
return "Gudjohnsen";
}
}
class Son
{
public function getFirstName()
{
return parent::getSurname();
}
}
The
Loading history...
|
|||
79 | } |
||
80 | |||
81 | /** |
||
82 | * The export action |
||
83 | * |
||
84 | * @param string $_format |
||
85 | * |
||
86 | * @Route("/export.{_format}", requirements={"_format" = "csv|xlsx|ods"}, name="kunstmaanredirectbundle_admin_redirect_export", methods={"GET", "POST"}) |
||
87 | * |
||
88 | * @return Response |
||
89 | */ |
||
90 | public function exportAction(Request $request, $_format) |
||
91 | { |
||
92 | return parent::doExportAction($this->getAdminListConfigurator(), $_format, $request); |
||
0 ignored issues
–
show
$this->getAdminListConfigurator() of type object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tConfiguratorInterface> is not a sub-type of object<Kunstmaan\AdminLi...tAdminListConfigurator> . It seems like you assume a concrete implementation of the interface Kunstmaan\AdminListBundl...stConfiguratorInterface to be always present.
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass. Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.
Loading history...
It seems like you call parent on a different method (
doExportAction() instead of exportAction() ). Are you sure this is correct? If so, you might want to change this to $this->doExportAction() .
This check looks for a call to a parent method whose name is different than the method from which it is called. Consider the following code: class Daddy
{
protected function getFirstName()
{
return "Eidur";
}
protected function getSurName()
{
return "Gudjohnsen";
}
}
class Son
{
public function getFirstName()
{
return parent::getSurname();
}
}
The
Loading history...
|
|||
93 | } |
||
94 | } |
||
95 |
This check looks for parameters that are defined as one type in their type hint or doc comment but seem to be used as a narrower type, i.e an implementation of an interface or a subclass.
Consider changing the type of the parameter or doing an instanceof check before assuming your parameter is of the expected type.