Generated banner for Github Actions Hardening
Generated logo for Github Actions Hardening

Github Actions Hardening

GitHubOfficialFirst committed by AmirhosseinHonardoustDistributed by GitHub

  • Skill
  • Review and audit
  • Security
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

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.
— the description by AmirhosseinHonardoust

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

GitHub Actions Hardening is a security-focused reviewer designed to audit .github/workflows/*.yml files. Unlike general code linters, this skill identifies risks specific to the GitHub Actions threat model, such as untrusted input injection via ${{ }} interpolation, privilege escalation in workflow triggers, and supply-chain risks from mutable action references. It provides a structured audit process to ensure workflows follow the principle of least privilege and are resilient against common CI-based attacks.

What it does

  • Identifies script injection vulnerabilities where ${{ }} expressions are interpolated directly into shell commands.
  • Audits workflow triggers for privilege escalation risks, specifically targeting pull_request_target and workflow_run.
  • Validates GITHUB_TOKEN permissions to ensure they follow the principle of least privilege.
  • Checks for secure supply-chain practices, including mandatory SHA-pinning for third-party actions.
  • Detects improper secret handling and potential exposure in logs or untrusted job contexts.
  • Provides a structured report with severity ratings and concrete before/after remediation examples.

When to use it

  • When auditing existing GitHub Actions workflows for security vulnerabilities.
  • When authoring new CI/CD pipelines to ensure they are secure by default.
  • When a workflow uses sensitive triggers like pull_request_target or workflow_run.
  • When you need to harden GITHUB_TOKEN permissions or implement OIDC for cloud authentication.
  • When you are concerned about supply-chain risks from third-party actions.

Advantages

  • Focuses on CI-specific threat models that standard linters often ignore.
  • Provides actionable, concrete remediation steps rather than just flagging issues.
  • Helps prevent common RCE and token-theft scenarios in CI environments.
  • Encourages secure-by-default practices like SHA-pinning and least-privilege permissions.

Usage examples

“Is my workflow safe? [paste workflow YAML]”
The agent will analyze the triggers, permissions, and run steps, providing a severity-ranked report with specific fixes for any identified injection or privilege risks.
“Review my CI for security issues and suggest improvements.”
The agent will perform a full audit of the provided workflow, flagging broad permissions, mutable action references, and unsafe input handling.
“Why is pull_request_target dangerous here?”
The agent will explain the trust boundary violation, detailing how the trigger runs with privileged access and how to split the workflow into a safer two-part pattern.
“How can I lock down my GITHUB_TOKEN permissions?”
The agent will provide a template for a restrictive permissions: {} block and guide you on how to grant only the necessary scopes per job.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/github/github-actions-hardening/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip github-actions-hardening.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by AmirhosseinHonardoust

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, or issue_comment triggers

  • Questions about GITHUB_TOKEN permissions or the permissions: 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 trust

  • pull_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.

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.body

  • github.event.pull_request.title, github.event.pull_request.body, .head.ref, .head.label

  • github.event.comment.body, github.event.review.body

  • github.event.pages.*.page_name, github.event.commits.*.message, github.event.head_commit.*

  • github.head_ref and any github.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) or contents: read, then grant the minimum per job (e.g. pull-requests: write only on the job that comments).

  • Flag any 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.

Step 5 — Audit Action References (Supply Chain)

For every uses::

  • Third-party actions (not 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.

  • 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 -x in 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_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.

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

SeverityMeaningExample
🔴 CRITICALToken/secret theft or RCE reachable by an outside contributorpull_request_target checking out and running fork code; ${{ github.event.* }} in a run: on a privileged trigger
🟠 HIGHExploitable supply-chain or scope problemThird-party action on a mutable tag/branch; write-all permissions; injection sink on issue_comment
🟡 MEDIUMRisk under conditions or chainingMissing permissions: block; secret reachable by a non-fork PR author
🔵 LOWHardening gap, low direct riskFirst-party action not SHA-pinned; persist-credentials left default on a non-privileged job
⚪ INFOObservation, not a vulnerabilityVersion 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_request is 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, why pull_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_TOKEN scopes, least-privilege permissions: 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 for github-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

Files

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: GitHub Copilot

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Needs Node.js

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

First committed by
GitHub avatar of AmirhosseinHonardoustAmirhosseinHonardoust
Publisher
GitHub (Official)
Distributed by
GitHub
Source
github/awesome-copilot · skills/github-actions-hardening · commit 797337f
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced
Contributors
AmirhosseinHonardoust

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by AmirhosseinHonardoust or GitHub.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download github-actions-hardening.zip