skills/github-actions-hardening/SKILL.md
Security hardening reviewer for GitHub Actions workflow files (.github/workflows/*.yml). Reasons about the Actions threat model that pattern matchers and general code linters miss — untrusted-input script injection, privileged triggers running fork code, mutable action references, and over-scoped tokens. Use this skill when asked to review, audit, harden, or secure a GitHub Actions workflow, when writing a new workflow, or for any request like "is this workflow safe?", "review my CI for security issues", "why is pull_request_target dangerous here?", "pin my actions", or "lock down GITHUB_TOKEN permissions". Covers script injection via ${{ }} interpolation, pull_request_target / workflow_run privilege escalation, SHA-pinning of third-party actions, least-privilege permissions, GITHUB_ENV/GITHUB_OUTPUT injection, secret exposure, OIDC over long-lived credentials, and self-hosted runner exposure on public repositories.
npx skillsauth add williamlimasilva/.copilot github-actions-hardeningInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
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.
Use this skill when the request involves:
.github/workflows/pull_request_target, workflow_run, or issue_comment triggersGITHUB_TOKEN permissions or the permissions: keyrun: stepsIn 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.
Follow these steps in order for every workflow reviewed.
Read every on: trigger and classify the workflow's privilege:
push, pull_request (from same repo) → runs with the contributor's own trustpull_request from 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.
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_ref and any github.event.* field a fork author can setRead references/injection.md for the complete sink list and the safe-pattern fixes.
If a pull_request_target or workflow_run workflow checks out PR/fork code
(ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}) and then runs it (build, test, install
scripts, npm install with lifecycle scripts, etc.), that is remote code execution against a
privileged token. Flag it as CRITICAL. The safe pattern is to split into two workflows: an
unprivileged pull_request workflow that runs the untrusted code, and a privileged
workflow_run workflow that only consumes its results.
permissions:permissions: block, the workflow inherits the repository default, which may
be read/write to everything. Flag it.permissions: {} (deny-all) or contents: read, then grant the minimum
per job (e.g. pull-requests: write only on the job that comments).permissions: write-all or broad write scopes that the steps don't actually need.Read references/permissions-and-tokens.md for the per-scope guidance and OIDC setup.
For every uses::
actions/* or github/*) MUST be pinned to a full 40-character
commit SHA, not a tag or branch. Tags and branches are mutable; a compromised upstream action
can rewrite v1 to malicious code that runs with your token and secrets.actions/* are lower risk but SHA-pinning is still the hardened recommendation.@main, @master, or any branch reference as HIGH — that is "latest" and can change under
you at any time.uses: foo/bar@<sha> # v2.1.0.Read references/supply-chain.md for pinning, Dependabot for actions, and artifact/cache risks.
set -x / bash -x in steps that touch
secrets.$GITHUB_ENV or $GITHUB_OUTPUT can inject environment
variables or step outputs — use the random-delimiter heredoc form and never write raw user input.actions/checkout leaves a token on disk by default; set persist-credentials: false when the
job later runs untrusted code.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 | 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 |
pull_request is dangerous just because it runs untrusted code — it has
no secrets and a read-only token. Reserve CRITICAL for the privileged triggers.Load these as needed:
references/triggers-and-privilege.md — Trust matrix for every trigger, why pull_request_target
and workflow_run are privileged, and the two-workflow safe pattern.
pull_request_target, workflow_run, issue_comment, fork, secrets, read-only token, trust boundaryreferences/injection.md — Full list of attacker-controllable ${{ }} contexts and the
env:-variable safe pattern for each sink (run, github-script, action inputs).
script injection, github.event, head_ref, issue title, env, intermediate variable, actions/github-scriptreferences/permissions-and-tokens.md — GITHUB_TOKEN scopes, least-privilege permissions:
recipes per job type, and OIDC for cloud auth instead of long-lived secrets.
permissions, GITHUB_TOKEN, write-all, contents: read, id-token, OIDC, least privilegereferences/supply-chain.md — SHA-pinning third-party actions, Dependabot for github-actions,
artifact and cache poisoning across workflow_run, and self-hosted runner exposure.
SHA pin, uses, mutable tag, Dependabot, download-artifact, cache, self-hosted runnerreferences/report-format.md — Output template: summary table, finding cards, and before/after
remediation blocks.
report, format, finding, summary, remediation, before, afterdevelopment
Anxiety-aware, evidence-driven collaboration for stalled or high-stakes work when a user says uncertainty, repeated setbacks, or lack of visible progress is causing significant anxiety or distress. Use immediately when explicitly invoked; when this fit is only inferred from the user's own account, ask permission before applying it. Preserve the user's ideal and turn grounded perspective-taking into persistent, bounded problem solving. Do not use to diagnose, provide therapy, manufacture certainty, or lower goals for reassurance.
development
Build, review, debug, package, and test Roslyn diagnostic analyzers, code fix providers, and incremental source generators. Use for DiagnosticAnalyzer, CodeFixProvider, IIncrementalGenerator, IOperation analysis, Microsoft.CodeAnalysis dependency pinning, Roslyn test harnesses, C#/VB tests, and analyzer NuGet packaging.
testing
Migrates a project that uses checked-in .designer.cs files behind .resx to using a source-generator instead
development
Polish any GitHub repository's surface — labels (emoji rating tiers, P0–P3 priority, impact severity), issue forms, PR template, CI workflows, CODEOWNERS, rulesets, docs. Repo meta & config only — no code logic touched. Use when creating a new repo or polishing an existing one.