Fix "be be" typos

Author: henrymercer

actions/ql/src/experimental/Security/CWE-200/SecretExfiltration.ql

@@ -19,5 +19,5 @@ import SecretExfiltrationFlow::PathGraph
 from SecretExfiltrationFlow::PathNode source, SecretExfiltrationFlow::PathNode sink
 where SecretExfiltrationFlow::flowPath(source, sink)
 select sink.getNode(), source, sink,
-  "Potential secret exfiltration in $@, which may be be leaked to an attacker-controlled resource.",
+  "Potential secret exfiltration in $@, which may be leaked to an attacker-controlled resource.",
   sink, sink.getNode().asExpr().(Expression).getRawExpression()

go/ql/lib/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
 
 ### Major Analysis Improvements
 
-* The shape of the Go data-flow graph has changed. Previously for code like `x := def(); use1(x); use2(x)`, there would be edges from the definition of `x` to each use. Now there is an edge from the definition to the first use, then another from the first use to the second, and so on. This means that data-flow barriers work differently - flow will not reach any uses after the barrier node. Where this is not desired it may be be necessary to add an additional flow step to propagate the flow forward. Additionally, when a variable may be subject to a side-effect, such as updating an array, passing a pointer to a function that might write through it or writing to a field of a struct, there is now a dedicated post-update node representing the variable after this side-effect has taken place. Previously post-update nodes were aliases for either a variable's definition, or were equal to the pre-update node. This led to backwards steps in the data-flow graph, which could cause false positives. For example, in the previous code there would be an edge from `x` in `use2(x)` back to the definition of `x`. If we define our sources as any argument of `use2` and our sinks as any argument of `use1` then this would lead to a false positive path. Now there are distinct post-update nodes and no backwards edge to the definition, so we will not find this false positive path.
+* The shape of the Go data-flow graph has changed. Previously for code like `x := def(); use1(x); use2(x)`, there would be edges from the definition of `x` to each use. Now there is an edge from the definition to the first use, then another from the first use to the second, and so on. This means that data-flow barriers work differently - flow will not reach any uses after the barrier node. Where this is not desired it may be necessary to add an additional flow step to propagate the flow forward. Additionally, when a variable may be subject to a side-effect, such as updating an array, passing a pointer to a function that might write through it or writing to a field of a struct, there is now a dedicated post-update node representing the variable after this side-effect has taken place. Previously post-update nodes were aliases for either a variable's definition, or were equal to the pre-update node. This led to backwards steps in the data-flow graph, which could cause false positives. For example, in the previous code there would be an edge from `x` in `use2(x)` back to the definition of `x`. If we define our sources as any argument of `use2` and our sinks as any argument of `use1` then this would lead to a false positive path. Now there are distinct post-update nodes and no backwards edge to the definition, so we will not find this false positive path.
 
 ### Minor Analysis Improvements
 

go/ql/lib/change-notes/released/5.0.0.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
 
 ### Major Analysis Improvements
 
-* The shape of the Go data-flow graph has changed. Previously for code like `x := def(); use1(x); use2(x)`, there would be edges from the definition of `x` to each use. Now there is an edge from the definition to the first use, then another from the first use to the second, and so on. This means that data-flow barriers work differently - flow will not reach any uses after the barrier node. Where this is not desired it may be be necessary to add an additional flow step to propagate the flow forward. Additionally, when a variable may be subject to a side-effect, such as updating an array, passing a pointer to a function that might write through it or writing to a field of a struct, there is now a dedicated post-update node representing the variable after this side-effect has taken place. Previously post-update nodes were aliases for either a variable's definition, or were equal to the pre-update node. This led to backwards steps in the data-flow graph, which could cause false positives. For example, in the previous code there would be an edge from `x` in `use2(x)` back to the definition of `x`. If we define our sources as any argument of `use2` and our sinks as any argument of `use1` then this would lead to a false positive path. Now there are distinct post-update nodes and no backwards edge to the definition, so we will not find this false positive path.
+* The shape of the Go data-flow graph has changed. Previously for code like `x := def(); use1(x); use2(x)`, there would be edges from the definition of `x` to each use. Now there is an edge from the definition to the first use, then another from the first use to the second, and so on. This means that data-flow barriers work differently - flow will not reach any uses after the barrier node. Where this is not desired it may be necessary to add an additional flow step to propagate the flow forward. Additionally, when a variable may be subject to a side-effect, such as updating an array, passing a pointer to a function that might write through it or writing to a field of a struct, there is now a dedicated post-update node representing the variable after this side-effect has taken place. Previously post-update nodes were aliases for either a variable's definition, or were equal to the pre-update node. This led to backwards steps in the data-flow graph, which could cause false positives. For example, in the previous code there would be an edge from `x` in `use2(x)` back to the definition of `x`. If we define our sources as any argument of `use2` and our sinks as any argument of `use1` then this would lead to a false positive path. Now there are distinct post-update nodes and no backwards edge to the definition, so we will not find this false positive path.
 
 ### Minor Analysis Improvements
 

ruby/ql/lib/codeql/ruby/frameworks/core/Kernel.qll

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ module Kernel {
 
   /**
    * Holds if `method` is a name of a private method in the `Kernel` module.
-   * These can be be invoked on `self`, on `Kernel`, or using a low-level primitive like `send` or `instance_eval`.
+   * These can be invoked on `self`, on `Kernel`, or using a low-level primitive like `send` or `instance_eval`.
    * ```ruby
    * puts "hello world"
    * Kernel.puts "hello world"