fix: return the image manifest digest instead of image id

[dkulchinsky]

Description

This PR supersedes #2310, fixes tests and adds safety around the image manifest digest extraction from the report

@afdesk for you review

Related issues

• Close Vulnerability Report's report.artifact.digest field is the artifact's image_id not digest #2259

Checklist

• I've read the guidelines for contributing to this repository.
• I've added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• I've updated the documentation with the relevant information (if needed).
• I've added usage information (if the PR introduces new options)
• I've included a "before" and "after" example to the description (if the PR is a user interface change).

[dkulchinsky]

looks like integration tests are failing because of dockerhub rate limits:

remote error: GET https://index.docker.io/v2/library/nginx/manifests/1.16: TOOMANYREQUESTS: You have reached your pull rate limit.

not sure if there's anything we can do, except to just retry?

[dkulchinsky]

retried CI, but hit with a new error which doesn't appear to be related to any of the changes I've introduced.

[dkulchinsky]

@afdesk FWIW, I ran the integration tests locally from my branch and all tests passed:

Ran 9 of 9 Specs in 287.035 seconds
SUCCESS! -- 9 Passed | 0 Failed | 0 Pending | 0 Skipped
PASS
coverage: 52.1% of statements in github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/operator, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/operator/predicate, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/operator/controller, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/plugin, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/plugin/trivy, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/configauditreport, github.com/aquasecurity/trivy-operator/pkg/vulnerabilityreport
composite coverage: 51.9% of statements

Ginkgo ran 1 suite in 5m30.7559755s
Test Suite Passed

[afdesk]

@dkulchinsky thanks for your contribution
I've rerun tests.
etcdserver: request is too large" is known error there (

[afdesk]

LGTM! thanks!

[dkulchinsky]

woot! thanks for the review and approval @afdesk , can we get this merged with a failing CI check?

[afdesk]

woot! thanks for the review and approval @afdesk , can we get this merged with a failing CI check?

I'd like to pass the test, it's on my side now

[dkulchinsky]

yay! looks like all checks are 🟢

[simar7]

thanks for the PR!