Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature request: Add support to scan actions #1095

Open
stefreak opened this issue Aug 24, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Feature request: Add support to scan actions #1095

stefreak opened this issue Aug 24, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@stefreak
Copy link

Currently support is missing to scan actions.

This can be helpful to detect and fix issues in local GitHub actions, or if I am using secure-workflows to fix issues in my github action repository.

Repository to reproduce this issue: https://github.com/stefreak/ossf-scorecard-repro-2189
Insecure actions in this repository: https://github.com/stefreak/ossf-scorecard-repro-2189/tree/main/.github/actions

Warnings in the secure-workflows UI about unsupported local actions:

KnownIssue-3: Action ./.github/actions/reproduce-composite is a local action. Local actions are not supported
KnownIssue-3: Action ./.github/actions/reproduce-docker-path is a local action. Local actions are not supported
@varunsh-coder
Copy link
Member

Thanks @stefreak for creating the issue!

To give you some context, there are two scenarios where the API to fix token permissions is called:

  1. A GitHub Actions workflow file content is provided as input. As an example, someone might paste the file in https://app.stepsecurity.io and click on Secure workflow button. In this case, we do not know the repository, so we cannot get to the local actions.
  2. A GitHub Actions workflow path is provided as input. This happens when OpenSSF Scorecard points to app.stepsecurity.io (e.g. https://app.stepsecurity.io/secureworkflow/step-security/supply-chain-goat/ci.yml/main?enable=permissions) and the repository and workflow path is provided as input. In this case, we do know the repo details, so ideally we should be able to get the local actions.

So, we should be able to do this for the 2nd scenario, and I think it is a great idea, because we can then fix more workflows.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants