Reviewing Dependency Changes
Manifest File Detection
Flag this skill when any of these files appear in the diff:
package.json,package-lock.json*.csproj,Directory.Packages.props,packages.lock.jsonCargo.toml,Cargo.lockgo.mod,go.sumrequirements.txt,pyproject.toml,poetry.lockGemfile,Gemfile.lock
Area 1: New Dependencies
When a PR adds a dependency that was not previously in the codebase, Bitwarden's Dependency Review and Approval process requires AppSec review and approval before integration. This applies to all new dependencies — production, dev, and test.
The submitter must provide the package name/version, ecosystem, justification, scope, affected products, and what it replaces. A security engineer creates a VULN task in Jira and evaluates the dependency across security (known CVEs, exploitability), license compatibility (permissive licenses like MIT/Apache-2.0 are acceptable; copyleft licenses like GPL/AGPL are flagged), maintenance health (active maintainers, recent releases, security policy), supply chain risk (typosquatting, ownership changes, obfuscated install scripts), and transitive dependencies before rendering an approval decision.
What to Check
- Is this a net-new dependency (not already present in the codebase)?
- Does the PR description contain an approval signal indicating the process was followed?
Approval Signals
Evidence that the dependency approval process was followed:
- PR description references a VULN task (e.g.,
VULN-1234) - PR description explicitly mentions AppSec approval or the dependency review process
Severity
When emitting a finding that references the Dependency Review and Approval process, always link the process name to https://bitwarden.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/APPSEC/pages/2774466657/Dependency+Review+and+Approval so the posted review comment points reviewers to the canonical documentation.
- No approval signal found → ⚠️ IMPORTANT: New dependency
<package>added. Bitwarden requires AppSec approval before introducing new dependencies. The submitter should reach out to the AppSec team to initiate the Dependency Review and Approval process. - Unclear whether approval was obtained → ❓ QUESTION: Was AppSec approval obtained for the new
<package>dependency?
What NOT to Flag
- Dependencies that already exist in the codebase (version updates are not new dependencies)
- Dependencies added by Renovate/Dependabot as transitive dependency updates (these are part of Stage 5 monitoring for existing approved dependencies)
Area 2: Major Version Bumps
A major version bump (e.g., v2 → v3) may introduce breaking changes that affect Bitwarden's codebase.
What to Check
- Is this a SemVer major version change?
- Does the PR description discuss breaking changes or migration steps?
Severity
- Major bump without migration discussion → ❓ QUESTION: This bumps
<package>from vXto vY(major). Were breaking changes evaluated? - Version downgrade → ⚠️ IMPORTANT:
<package>is being downgraded from vXto vY. This is unusual and may reintroduce resolved vulnerabilities.
Area 3: Lock File Hygiene
Lock files ensure reproducible builds. Inconsistencies between manifests and lock files are a build reliability and security concern.
What to Check
| Scenario | Finding |
|---|---|
| Manifest changed, lock file not updated | ⚠️ IMPORTANT: Lock file not updated to reflect manifest changes |
| Lock file changed, no manifest change | ❓ QUESTION: Lock file changed without a corresponding manifest change — was this intentional (e.g., npm audit fix)? |
| Lock file deleted | ⚠️ IMPORTANT: Lock file removal breaks reproducible builds |
What NOT to Flag
- Large lock file diffs from a small manifest change — this is normal behavior. Lock files can change significantly from a single dependency addition or version bump.
- Lock file-only changes that accompany a clear manifest change in the same PR.
Area 4: Automated Dependency PRs
Renovate and Dependabot PRs are part of Bitwarden's Stage 5 (Monitoring) process. These automated updates to existing approved dependencies require different review treatment.
How to Detect
- PR author:
renovate[bot],dependabot[bot], or similar bot accounts - PR title pattern: "Update ...", "Bump ...", "chore(deps): ..."
Review Guidance
| Scenario | Action |
|---|---|
| Minor/patch update to existing dependency | No approval-process finding needed. Focus on lock file hygiene and CI status. |
| Major version bump from bot | Flag per Area 2 — major bumps warrant human review regardless of source. |
| Bot PR introduces a net-new dependency | Flag per Area 1 — new dependencies require the approval process regardless of source. |
Area 5: Dependency Removal
When a dependency is removed from a manifest, verify the removal is complete.
What to Check
- Are there remaining code references to the removed package?
- JavaScript/TypeScript:
import ... from '<package>',require('<package>') - C#/.NET:
using <namespace>, references in other.csprojfiles - Rust:
use <crate>::,extern crate <crate> - Python:
import <package>,from <package> import
- JavaScript/TypeScript:
- Are there references in build or infrastructure files?
Dockerfile,docker-compose.yml- CI workflow files (
.github/workflows/*.yml) - Build scripts,
Makefile, task runners
Severity
- Dead imports or references remain → ♻️ DEBT:
<package>removed from manifest but still referenced in code.