Github Actions Hardening
GitHubOfficialFirst committed by AmirhosseinHonardoustDistributed by GitHub
- Skill
- Review and audit
- Security
- MIT
- No issues found
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
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/github/github-actions-hardening/downloadUnzip 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, orissue_commenttriggersQuestions about
GITHUB_TOKENpermissions or thepermissions:keyPinning actions to commit SHAs vs tags vs branches
Handling untrusted input (issue titles, PR bodies, branch names, commit messages) in
run:stepsOIDC / 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: writeonly 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 rewritev1to 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; ${{ github.event.* }} in a run: on a privileged trigger |
| 🟠 HIGH | Exploitable supply-chain or scope problem | Third-party action on a mutable tag/branch; write-all permissions; injection sink on issue_comment |
| 🟡 MEDIUM | Risk under conditions or chaining | Missing permissions: block; secret reachable by a non-fork PR author |
| 🔵 LOW | Hardening gap, low direct risk | First-party action not SHA-pinned; persist-credentials left default on a non-privileged job |
| ⚪ INFO | Observation, not a vulnerability | Version comment missing next to a pinned SHA |
Output Rules
Always show a findings summary table (counts by severity) first.
Group by issue type, not by file.
Be exact — quote the offending line and give the line location.
Always pair every CRITICAL/HIGH with a concrete corrected YAML snippet.
Never claim a fork
pull_requestis dangerous just because it runs untrusted code — it has no secrets and a read-only token. Reserve CRITICAL for the privileged triggers.If the workflow is already hardened, say so and list what was checked.
Reference Files
Load these as needed:
references/triggers-and-privilege.md— Trust matrix for every trigger, whypull_request_targetandworkflow_runare privileged, and the two-workflow safe pattern.Search patterns:
pull_request_target,workflow_run,issue_comment,fork,secrets,read-only token,trust boundary
references/injection.md— Full list of attacker-controllable${{ }}contexts and theenv:-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 acrossworkflow_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
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer907 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- SKILL.md9.6 KiB
- references/injection.md3.0 KiB
- references/permissions-and-tokens.md2.7 KiB
- references/report-format.md1.9 KiB
- references/supply-chain.md2.9 KiB
- references/triggers-and-privilege.md3.3 KiB
references/supply-chain.md
Supply Chain
A workflow runs other people's code every time it uses: an action. Those actions execute with
your token and (on privileged triggers) your secrets, so their integrity is your integrity.
Pin Third-Party Actions to a Commit SHA
Tags (@v4) and branches (@main) are mutable — the upstream owner (or anyone who compromises
them) can repoint them to new code without you changing a line. A full 40-character commit SHA is
immutable.
# Mutable — the tag can be moved to malicious code
- uses: some-org/some-action@v3
# Pinned — this exact tree, forever
- uses: some-org/some-action@3f1e0a9c8b7d6e5f4a3b2c1d0e9f8a7b6c5d4e3f # v3.2.1Rules:
Third-party actions (anything not
actions/*orgithub/*) → MUST be SHA-pinned. Flag tags and branches as HIGH.@main/@master→ HIGH regardless of publisher; that is unversioned "latest".First-party
actions/*→ SHA-pinning is the hardened recommendation (LOW if only tag-pinned).Keep a trailing
# vX.Y.Zcomment so humans and Dependabot can read the intended version.
This is not theoretical: real incidents have seen popular actions' tags repointed to code that exfiltrated secrets from every workflow that referenced the mutable tag.
Let Dependabot Update the Pins
SHA pins go stale. Enable Dependabot for the github-actions ecosystem so updates arrive as
reviewable PRs (it understands the # vX.Y.Z comment and bumps the SHA):
# .github/dependabot.yml
version: 2
updates:
- package-ecosystem: github-actions
directory: /
schedule:
interval: weeklyArtifact and Cache Poisoning
An artifact uploaded by an untrusted
pull_requestbuild is untrusted data. A privilegedworkflow_runmay download it, but must treat it as data only — never execute it, and validate paths when extracting (a crafted artifact can contain../path-traversal entries).Caches are keyed and can be populated by less-privileged runs; do not trust cached build outputs to be untampered in a privileged context.
Self-Hosted Runners on Public Repos
Default (GitHub-hosted) runners are ephemeral — a fresh VM per job, destroyed after. Self-hosted runners persist, so untrusted fork PR code running on one can:
Leave behind tools/backdoors for the next job,
Read other repositories' checkouts or credentials on the same machine,
Pivot into your network.
Never use self-hosted runners for workflows that public forks can trigger. If you must, use ephemeral, isolated, single-use runners and never expose secrets to fork-triggered jobs.
checkout Credential Persistence
actions/checkout writes the token into .git/config by default so later git steps can push.
If the job subsequently runs untrusted code, that code can read the token. Set
persist-credentials: false when you don't need to push, especially before running build/test of
untrusted code.
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
AmirhosseinHonardoust
- 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