fix(miner): reject path-traversal repo segments in the 4 remaining normalizeRepoFullName parsers

[davion-knight]

What & why

repo-clone.ts exports isValidRepoSegment, which rejects a repo owner or
repo segment containing ./../control-characters/whitespace before it is
persisted to SQLite or echoed back through a sibling CLI. #5831 and #7525 rolled
this guard out across the miner's normalizeRepoFullName parsers, but four were
missed and still only checked "exactly one slash, both halves non-empty":

• packages/loopover-miner/lib/contribution-profile-cache.ts
• packages/loopover-miner/lib/prediction-ledger.ts
• packages/loopover-miner/lib/replay-snapshot.ts
• packages/loopover-miner/lib/run-state.ts

Inputs like owner/.., ../repo, or a tab/newline segment passed these four
while being rejected by every already-guarded sibling — and each of these four
backs a SQLite key and is echoed through its sibling CLI, the exact rationale
#5831/#7525 cited.

Change

Call isValidRepoSegment on both the owner and repo segment in all four
parsers, using the identical call shape as the ten already-fixed siblings
(rename/remove nothing else). Adds a per-file regression test asserting a
path-traversal / invalid-character segment throws invalid_repo_full_name,
covering both operands, mirroring test/unit/miner-claim-ledger.test.ts.

Closes #7795

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-22 18:12:44 UTC}

8 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 100/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a narrow, well-targeted security fix: it adds the missing `isValidRepoSegment(owner)`/`isValidRepoSegment(repo)` guard to the four `normalizeRepoFullName` parsers in contribution-profile-cache.ts, prediction-ledger.ts, replay-snapshot.ts, and run-state.ts, using the identical call shape already present in the ten fixed siblings. Each file's guard is placed correctly after the existing shape check and before the value is used as a SQLite key, and each gets a regression test covering both the owner and repo operand for `..` and whitespace segments, matching the pattern in miner-run-state.test.ts. The change closes #7795 exactly as described and does not touch unrelated code.

Nits — 2 non-blocking

• The four near-identical regression tests (in miner-run-state.test.ts, miner-contribution-profile-cache.test.ts, miner-prediction-ledger.test.ts, miner-replay-snapshot.test.ts) repeat the same six-assertion pattern almost verbatim — worth noting as expected duplication across sibling stores rather than something to dedupe, since each store has its own read/write API.
• None beyond what's already covered — the fix is minimal and matches the established pattern exactly.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#7795
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 35 registered-repo PR(s), 19 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	davion-knight; Gittensor profile; 35 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
All four flagged files (contribution-profile-cache.ts, prediction-ledger.ts, replay-snapshot.ts, run-state.ts) now import and call isValidRepoSegment on both owner and repo in normalizeRepoFullName, matching the exact call shape used by the ten already-fixed siblings, and each file gets a regression test asserting a path-traversal/invalid-character segment throws invalid_repo_full_name for both op

Review context

• Author: davion-knight
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 35 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review

[loopover-orb]

LoopOver approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 25.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 38.40%. Comparing base (25e2df1) to head (09ad4e1).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...s/loopover-miner/lib/contribution-profile-cache.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
packages/loopover-miner/lib/prediction-ledger.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
packages/loopover-miner/lib/run-state.ts	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (25.00%) is below the target coverage (99.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8065       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   91.82%   38.40%   -53.42%     
===========================================
  Files         734        4      -730     
  Lines       75019      276    -74743     
  Branches    23037       59    -22978     
===========================================
- Hits        68885      106    -68779     
+ Misses       5034      170     -4864     
+ Partials     1100        0     -1100     

Flag	Coverage Δ
rees	?
shard-1	38.40% <25.00%> (-15.87%)	⬇️
shard-2	0.00% <0.00%> (-52.58%)	⬇️
shard-3	0.00% <0.00%> (-55.11%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-miner/lib/replay-snapshot.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...s/loopover-miner/lib/contribution-profile-cache.ts	0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%)	⬇️
packages/loopover-miner/lib/prediction-ledger.ts	0.00% <0.00%> (-80.60%)	⬇️
packages/loopover-miner/lib/run-state.ts	0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%)	⬇️

... and 730 files with indirect coverage changes