Mode d’emploi
- Copiez la commande et examinez le paquet avant de l’installer dans votre environnement agent.
- Consultez le document original pour les outils, identifiants et environnements requis.
- Décrivez les entrées et le livrable souhaité ; comparez la sortie aux sources.
npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill github-actions-hardeningAvant de commencer
- L’installation n’inclut ni abonnement au modèle, ni quota API, ni accès aux fichiers.
- Étoiles et installations reflètent l’activité, pas un test indépendant de qualité ou de sécurité.
Rendu depuis le dépôt source en conservant titres, exemples, code, tableaux, liens et images.
GitHub Actions Hardening
A focused security reviewer for GitHub Actions workflows. It reasons about the Actions-specific threat model — where trust boundaries live in trigger types, token scopes, and string interpolation — rather than the application-code vulnerabilities a general security scanner looks for. Most workflow risks are invisible to language linters because the dangerous code is the YAML itself and the way GitHub expands ${{ }} expressions into a shell before your script runs.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when the request involves:
- Reviewing, auditing, or hardening any file under
.github/workflows/ - Authoring a new workflow and wanting it secure by default
- A workflow that uses
pull_request_target,workflow_run, orissue_commenttriggers - Questions about
GITHUB_TOKENpermissions or thepermissions:key - Pinning actions to commit SHAs vs tags vs branches
- Handling untrusted input (issue titles, PR bodies, branch names, commit messages) in
run:steps - OIDC / cloud authentication from Actions, or secret handling in CI
- Self-hosted runners on public repositories
- Any request like "is this workflow safe?", "secure my CI", or "review this GitHub Action"
The Core Insight
In a workflow, *`${{ <expr> }}` is expanded by the runner into the script before the shell executes it.* So a step like:
- run: echo "Title: ${{ github.event.issue.title }}"is not passing a variable — it is pasting attacker-controlled text directly into your shell command. An issue titled "; <attacker-command> # is concatenated into the script and executed. This single mechanism is the most common real-world Actions vulnerability, and models routinely generate it. Treat every ${{ }} that contains data an outside contributor can influence as a code-injection sink.
Execution Workflow
Follow these steps in order for every workflow reviewed.
Step 1 — Map the Triggers and Trust Level
Read every on: trigger and classify the workflow's privilege:
push,pull_request(from same repo) → runs with the contributor's own trustpull_requestfrom a fork → runs with a read-only token, no secrets (safe by design)pull_request_target,workflow_run,issue_comment,issues→ run in the context of the
base repository with a read/write token and full access to secrets, but can be triggered by outside contributors. These are the dangerous triggers.
Read references/triggers-and-privilege.md for the full trust matrix.
Step 2 — Hunt for Script Injection
For every run: block, every script: in actions/github-script, and every input to a custom action, list the ${{ }} expressions and check whether any resolve to attacker-controllable data. High-risk contexts include:
github.event.issue.title,github.event.issue.bodygithub.event.pull_request.title,github.event.pull_request.body,.head.ref,.head.labelgithub.event.comment.body,github.event.review.bodygithub.event.pages.*.page_name,github.event.commits.*.message,github.event.head_commit.*github.head_refand anygithub.event.*field a fork author can set
Read references/injection.md for the complete sink list and the safe-pattern fixes.
Step 3 — Check Privileged Triggers Don't Execute Untrusted Code
If a pull_request_target or workflow_run workflow checks out PR/fork code (ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}) and then runs it (build, test, install scripts, npm install with lifecycle scripts, etc.), that is remote code execution against a privileged token. Flag it as CRITICAL. The safe pattern is to split into two workflows: an unprivileged pull_request workflow that runs the untrusted code, and a privileged workflow_run workflow that only consumes its results.
Step 4 — Audit permissions:
- If there is no
permissions:block, the workflow inherits the repository default, which may
be read/write to everything. Flag it.
- Recommend a top-level
permissions: {}(deny-all) orcontents: read, then grant the minimum
per job (e.g. pull-requests: write only on the job that comments).
- Flag any
permissions: write-allor broadwritescopes that the steps don't actually need.
Read references/permissions-and-tokens.md for the per-scope guidance and OIDC setup.
Step 5 — Audit Action References (Supply Chain)
For every uses::
- Third-party actions (not
actions/*orgithub/*) MUST be pinned to a full 40-character
commit SHA, not a tag or branch. Tags and branches are mutable; a compromised upstream action can rewrite v1 to malicious code that runs with your token and secrets.
- First-party
actions/*are lower risk but SHA-pinning is still the hardened recommendation. - Flag
@main,@master, or any branch reference as HIGH — that is "latest" and can change under
you at any time.
- Note the human-readable version in a trailing comment:
uses: foo/bar@<sha> # v2.1.0.
Read references/supply-chain.md for pinning, Dependabot for actions, and artifact/cache risks.
Step 6 — Check Secret and Output Handling
- No secrets echoed, printed, or written to logs; no
set -x/bash -xin steps that touch
secrets.
- Secrets must not be passed to steps that run untrusted code or to untrusted third-party actions.
- Untrusted multiline data written to
$GITHUB_ENVor$GITHUB_OUTPUTcan inject environment
variables or step outputs — use the random-delimiter heredoc form and never write raw user input.
actions/checkoutleaves a token on disk by default; setpersist-credentials: falsewhen the
job later runs untrusted code.
Step 7 — Produce the Report
Output findings using the format in references/report-format.md: a severity summary table first, then grouped findings with file, the exact offending YAML, the risk in plain English, and a concrete before/after fix. Never auto-apply changes — present them for review.
Severity Guide
| Severity | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 🔴 CRITICAL | Token/secret theft or RCE reachable by an outside contributor | pull_request_target checking out and running fork code; ${{ github.event.* }} in a run: on a privileged trigger |
| 🟠 HIGH | Exploitable supply-chain or scope problem | Third-party action on a mutable tag/branch; write-all permissions; injection sink on issue_comment |
| 🟡 MEDIUM | Risk under conditions or chaining | Missing permissions: block; secret reachable by a non-fork PR author |
| 🔵 LOW | Hardening gap, low direct risk | First-party action not SHA-pinned; persist-credentials left default on a non-privileged job |
| ⚪ INFO | Observation, not a vulnerability | Version comment missing next to a pinned SHA |
Output Rules
- Always show a findings summary table (counts by severity) first.
- Group by issue type, not by file.
- Be exact — quote the offending line and give the line location.
- Always pair every CRITICAL/HIGH with a concrete corrected YAML snippet.
- Never claim a fork
pull_requestis dangerous just because it runs untrusted code — it has
no secrets and a read-only token. Reserve CRITICAL for the privileged triggers.
- If the workflow is already hardened, say so and list what was checked.
Reference Files
Load these as needed:
references/triggers-and-privilege.md— Trust matrix for every trigger, whypull_request_target
and workflow_run are privileged, and the two-workflow safe pattern.
- Search patterns:
pull_request_target,workflow_run,issue_comment,fork,secrets,read-only token,trust boundary references/injection.md— Full list of attacker-controllable${{ }}contexts and the
env:-variable safe pattern for each sink (run, github-script, action inputs).
- Search patterns:
script injection,github.event,head_ref,issue title,env,intermediate variable,actions/github-script references/permissions-and-tokens.md—GITHUB_TOKENscopes, least-privilegepermissions:
recipes per job type, and OIDC for cloud auth instead of long-lived secrets.
- Search patterns:
permissions,GITHUB_TOKEN,write-all,contents: read,id-token,OIDC,least privilege references/supply-chain.md— SHA-pinning third-party actions, Dependabot forgithub-actions,
artifact and cache poisoning across workflow_run, and self-hosted runner exposure.
- Search patterns:
SHA pin,uses,mutable tag,Dependabot,download-artifact,cache,self-hosted runner references/report-format.md— Output template: summary table, finding cards, and before/after
remediation blocks.
- Search patterns:
report,format,finding,summary,remediation,before,after





