fix(pr-pipeline): hold an unpinned uses: a composite action gains (hardening deferred) #10771

Activity

1. github-actions

   added

   needs-triageNot yet classified. Floor until a type and one priority tier are set.Not yet classified. Floor until a type and one priority tier are set.

   on Oct 28, 2026
2. github-actions commented on Oct 28, 2026

   

   github-actionsBot

   on Oct 28, 2026 – with GitHub Actions

   Last edited by melodic-automation-lanes

   Contributor

   More actions

   Proposed work class: work-class: scoped
   Basis: automated intake triage; the lanes App applied this class.

   Size: Medium
   Complexity: Medium
   Uncertainty: Known
   Flags: none
   Blocked by: none

   Understood: the babysit merge gate's workflow checks (babysit_risk.py) read only .github/workflows/*.y{,a}ml, so a composite action under .github/actions/**/action.y{,a}ml can gain an unpinned uses:, a new secret input or a model leg without a person hold. The proposal is to treat those action files as workflow text for the net-added uses: check (hold unless pinned to a 40-character SHA) and for the existing secret and model-leg checks, and to cover the four sibling review checks too. The scope and approach are clear from the issue. I found no duplicate among the open issues.

   _{Automated triage, applied by the lanes App.}
3. github-actions

   added

   priority: mediumReal value, no hard deadline; normal backlog flow.Real value, no hard deadline; normal backlog flow.

   and removed

   needs-triageNot yet classified. Floor until a type and one priority tier are set.Not yet classified. Floor until a type and one priority tier are set.

   on Oct 28, 2026
4. github-actions

   added the

   Bug

   issue type on Oct 28, 2026
5. melodic-automation-lanes

   added

   status: readyTriaged, unblocked, and fully specified; eligible to pick up.Triaged, unblocked, and fully specified; eligible to pick up.

   work-class: scopedA briefed fix or small feature; blast radius bounded by the brief, tests exist.A briefed fix or small feature; blast radius bounded by the brief, tests exist.

   status: confirmedA maintainer confirmed the item is real and in scope; ready to be worked.A maintainer confirmed the item is real and in scope; ready to be worked.

   and removed

   status: readyTriaged, unblocked, and fully specified; eligible to pick up.Triaged, unblocked, and fully specified; eligible to pick up.

   on Oct 28, 2026
6. melodic-automation-lanes commented on Oct 28, 2026

   

   melodic-automation-lanesBot

   on Oct 28, 2026

   Contributor

   More actions

   Not admitted to the issue lane: no trusted-human acceptance criteria: a listed human must put the confirmed - [ ] criteria in the body or post them as their own comment, or, on an issue a listed human filed, intake's newest refinement comment must hold them unedited. Admission takes the issue once each of those is met, when intake triages it again (.github/actions/resolve-config/admission-rules.json).
7. melodic-automation-lanes commented on Oct 28, 2026

   

   melodic-automation-lanesBot

   on Oct 28, 2026

   Contributor

   More actions

   The latest triage verdict holds nothing: admission moved the issue to status: confirmed; its comment says why.
8. melodic-automation-lanes

   added

   status: needs-decisionAwaiting a human or maintainer judgment call.Awaiting a human or maintainer judgment call.

   on Oct 28, 2026
9. melodic-automation-lanes commented on Oct 28, 2026

   

   melodic-automation-lanesBot

   on Oct 28, 2026

   Contributor

   More actions

   Refinement. A read-only run explored this repository, searched its issues and pull requests, and read the allowed docs to draft what follows. On an issue a listed human filed, it counts as the issue's spec once posted, while unedited; it is still model text, so check it.

   Intended outcome: Composite action files under .github/actions/**/action.y{,a}ml get the same net-added uses:, secret and model-leg checks as workflow files, and an added uses: not pinned to a 40-character SHA holds for a person.

   Related work

   • feat(pr-pipeline): carry a hold-path approval across pushes that touch no hold-path file #10759 (related): Also changes pr-pipeline hold behaviour, so it may touch the same hold code.
   • refactor(pr-pipeline): generate the hold-floor copies from one table #10674 (related): Merged refactor that generated the hold-floor copies from one table; the hold paths this issue extends may be affected.
   • pr-merge cost hold: LOW-rated shapes S&C's probe still passes #9241 (related): Open cost-hold gaps in the same _cost_reasons gate.

   Open questions

   1. Should this wait for #​10743 to merge? The base checkout has no unpinned-uses check and no permission-widening-review or privileged-trigger-review codes in babysit_risk.py, so those checks must come from #​10743.
      RECOMMENDED: Yes. Make #​10743 a dependency and implement against its merged code, adding the action globs to the shared workflow-path predicate. Basis: plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:749
   2. Which checks are in scope? The body names the unpinned uses:, secret and model-leg checks, and also says the permission-widening and privileged-trigger reviews read workflow paths only.
      RECOMMENDED: Cover the unpinned uses:, secret and model-leg checks. Include permission-widening and privileged-trigger only if they exist after #​10743, and only where the key is meaningful in a composite action. Basis: judgment
   3. Should the cost-only checks (runs-on, cron, timeouts, retention, new runners) also apply to action files, or stay workflow-only?
      RECOMMENDED: Keep them workflow-only. Composite actions have no runs-on, cron or job timeouts, and _cost_reasons at babysit_risk.py:1007 and :1025 applies all of them under one workflow flag, so the change must split that flag. Basis: plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:1025

   Sources read

   • plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:760: _WORKFLOWS is only .github/workflows/*.yml and *.yaml
   • plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:881: is_workflow_path matches only _WORKFLOWS
   • plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:1007: _cost_reasons gates secret and model-leg checks on is_workflow_path
   • plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:935: _net_added helper compares matches gained over removed lines
   • plugins/source-control/skills/babysit-prs/scripts/babysit_risk.py:749: only secret-exposure-review and agent-surface-review codes exist in the base

   To answer, post a comment that starts with this line:

   **Decision recorded.** <answer>
   

   _{Automated refinement by the lanes App. Answer with a comment whose first line is **Decision recorded.**.}
10. kyle-sexton

    changed the title [-]fix(pr-pipeline): hold an unpinned uses: a composite action gains[/-] [+]fix(pr-pipeline): hold an unpinned uses: a composite action gains (hardening deferred)[/+] on Oct 30, 2026
11. kyle-sexton commented on Oct 30, 2026

    

    kyle-sexton

    on Oct 30, 2026

    MemberAuthor

    More actions

    Decision recorded. Hardening deferred, closed as not planned under owner standing direction §10: "Phase: maximum throughput until open issues and open PRs both reach 0. Hardening (re-adding holds, pins, reviews) is deferred to after that, as configuration edits."

    This issue adds a hold, a pin or a check that guards against our own actors, and none of its gaps can leak a token or secret, compromise the owner accounts or bill. §10 counts only those as a §3 boundary. Secret-leak scanning (gitleaks) stays on, as do both review lanes and ci-status (owner Q15).

    Reopen trigger: open issues = 0 and open PRs = 0. The hardening pass finds this with is:issue is:closed reason:"not planned" in:title "hardening deferred".
12. kyle-sexton

    closed this as not plannedon Oct 30, 2026