[PR #4611] docs: add a .NET static-analysis walkthrough #6333

Open
opened 2026-10-31 01:13:39 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 0 comments
Owner

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/4611
Author: @nnagar26
Created: 10/16/2026
Status: 🔄 Open

Base: main ← Head: docs/d05-managed-static-walkthrough


📝 Commits (4)

  • d233ae8 docs: add managed static-analysis walkthrough
  • 2c7dfba docs: link managed analysis walkthrough
  • 9abfbcd docs: make walkthrough path command reproducible
  • 5b6822b docs: clarify managed walkthrough steps

📊 Changes

2 files changed (+47 additions, -0 deletions)

View changed files

📝 docs/managed-code-analysis.md (+3 -0)
➕ docs/managed-code-static-walkthrough.md (+44 -0)

📄 Description

Summary

Add a source-built .NET static-analysis walkthrough for D05 in #778 and link it from the managed-code guide.

Problem and expected behavior

The managed-code guide lists the tools but has no small end-to-end example. Readers can build a benign assembly from source, inspect its metadata, CIL, and declared native import, and compare the result with the source oracle.

Change and scope

Add one .NET 8 sample walkthrough using the existing artifact, member, and native-boundary CLI commands. The sample is never run; it demonstrates existing static-analysis behavior only. No tools, providers, fixtures, or generated outputs change.

Contract and boundary impact

  • Semantic owner and earliest changed stage: documentation.
  • Contribution scope fit and linked maintainer decision: documentation of existing static analysis; no new capability or scope decision required.
  • CLI and MCP/tool-catalog contract: unchanged; command names match the managed-code guide.
  • Provider, bridge, target-format, or platform compatibility: no provider changes; the sample produces a managed PE/CLI assembly with the .NET 8 SDK.
  • Evidence, artifact, provenance, or reconstruction contract: no contract change; the guide distinguishes a declared import from runtime behavior.
  • Target selection, authority, upstream behavior, and cleanup details: no target is loaded or executed.
  • Generated metadata, package, or installation impact: none.

Expected effects:

  • Documentation or usability only; no target interaction.

Evidence and regression coverage

  • Tests added or updated: none; documentation-only.
  • Base reproduction or other evidence: source-derived. The sample declares MessageBoxW from user32.dll; this is the independent oracle for the illustrated inspection.
  • User-visible CLI/MCP output: not captured.
  • Remaining proof gaps: the sample build and REA CLI commands were not run in this environment; CI should run the documentation checks.

Validation performed

  • Reviewed the CLI command names and limits against docs/managed-code-analysis.md on the base branch.
  • npm run docs:check — not run; no local repository checkout was available.

Compatibility, safety, and release

  • Breaking changes or migration steps: none.
  • Real Hopper/Ghidra, browser, or OS coverage: not applicable; the walkthrough is static and does not load the sample.
  • Package or release metadata impact: none.
  • Security, privacy, process, or containment review: documentation only; the sample's Main returns without calling the declared import.

Author readiness

Human owner: @nnagar26

  • I reviewed the final diff and relevant existing code, understand the change and its edge cases, and take responsibility for the complete PR, including AI-assisted work.
  • I checked the evidence above, confirmed it supports the current change, and recorded meaningful validation gaps.
  • I declare this PR ready for initial maintainer review.

Before merge

  • This PR addresses a concrete problem or an agreed enhancement.
  • Material scope and authority questions are resolved, and any required maintainer scope decision covers the final diff.
  • The PR has one focused outcome and the title follows type(scope): outcome.
  • Related issue is linked, or the reason for not linking one is stated above.
  • Tests cover changed observable behavior and meaningful failure paths.
  • Owning docs, contracts, and generated metadata are updated where needed.
  • User-visible CLI/MCP changes include representative output.
  • I checked the final diff for secrets, unrelated cleanup, and unsupported claims.

🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/morluto/rea/pull/4611 **Author:** [@nnagar26](https://github.com/nnagar26) **Created:** 10/16/2026 **Status:** 🔄 Open **Base:** `main` ← **Head:** `docs/d05-managed-static-walkthrough` --- ### 📝 Commits (4) - [`d233ae8`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/d233ae8da0eb797f4a8ade439761a97c0e801b4b) docs: add managed static-analysis walkthrough - [`2c7dfba`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/2c7dfbad987b21459e9ad307d87a790fc5909378) docs: link managed analysis walkthrough - [`9abfbcd`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/9abfbcdd8bbb0e3b26772fb21c72606204589085) docs: make walkthrough path command reproducible - [`5b6822b`](https://github.com/morluto/rea/commit/5b6822b4ec369a087f021613fc5bf43b99441d5b) docs: clarify managed walkthrough steps ### 📊 Changes **2 files changed** (+47 additions, -0 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `docs/managed-code-analysis.md` (+3 -0) ➕ `docs/managed-code-static-walkthrough.md` (+44 -0) </details> ### 📄 Description ## Summary Add a source-built .NET static-analysis walkthrough for D05 in #778 and link it from the managed-code guide. ## Problem and expected behavior The managed-code guide lists the tools but has no small end-to-end example. Readers can build a benign assembly from source, inspect its metadata, CIL, and declared native import, and compare the result with the source oracle. ## Change and scope Add one .NET 8 sample walkthrough using the existing artifact, member, and native-boundary CLI commands. The sample is never run; it demonstrates existing static-analysis behavior only. No tools, providers, fixtures, or generated outputs change. ## Contract and boundary impact - Semantic owner and earliest changed stage: documentation. - Contribution scope fit and linked maintainer decision: documentation of existing static analysis; no new capability or scope decision required. - CLI and MCP/tool-catalog contract: unchanged; command names match the managed-code guide. - Provider, bridge, target-format, or platform compatibility: no provider changes; the sample produces a managed PE/CLI assembly with the .NET 8 SDK. - Evidence, artifact, provenance, or reconstruction contract: no contract change; the guide distinguishes a declared import from runtime behavior. - Target selection, authority, upstream behavior, and cleanup details: no target is loaded or executed. - Generated metadata, package, or installation impact: none. Expected effects: - [x] Documentation or usability only; no target interaction. ## Evidence and regression coverage - Tests added or updated: none; documentation-only. - Base reproduction or other evidence: source-derived. The sample declares MessageBoxW from user32.dll; this is the independent oracle for the illustrated inspection. - User-visible CLI/MCP output: not captured. - Remaining proof gaps: the sample build and REA CLI commands were not run in this environment; CI should run the documentation checks. ## Validation performed - Reviewed the CLI command names and limits against docs/managed-code-analysis.md on the base branch. - npm run docs:check — not run; no local repository checkout was available. ## Compatibility, safety, and release - Breaking changes or migration steps: none. - Real Hopper/Ghidra, browser, or OS coverage: not applicable; the walkthrough is static and does not load the sample. - Package or release metadata impact: none. - Security, privacy, process, or containment review: documentation only; the sample's Main returns without calling the declared import. ## Author readiness Human owner: @nnagar26 - [ ] I reviewed the final diff and relevant existing code, understand the change and its edge cases, and take responsibility for the complete PR, including AI-assisted work. - [ ] I checked the evidence above, confirmed it supports the current change, and recorded meaningful validation gaps. - [ ] I declare this PR ready for initial maintainer review. ## Before merge - [ ] This PR addresses a concrete problem or an agreed enhancement. - [ ] Material scope and authority questions are resolved, and any required maintainer scope decision covers the final diff. - [ ] The PR has one focused outcome and the title follows type(scope): outcome. - [ ] Related issue is linked, or the reason for not linking one is stated above. - [ ] Tests cover changed observable behavior and meaningful failure paths. - [ ] Owning docs, contracts, and generated metadata are updated where needed. - [ ] User-visible CLI/MCP changes include representative output. - [ ] I checked the final diff for secrets, unrelated cleanup, and unsupported claims. --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
morluto/rea#6333
No description provided.