[thyrfa]

It is incredibly bad practice that their "become the github app as you desire" keys to the kingdom private key was just sitting in the environment variables. Anybody can get hacked, but that's just basic secrets management, that doesn't have to be there. Github LITERALLY SAYS on their doc that storing it in an environment variable is a bad idea. Just day 1 stuff. https://docs.github.com/en/apps/creating-github-apps/authent...

[doesnt_know]

If it’s not a secret that is used to sign something, then the secret has to get from the vault to the application at some point.

What mechanism are you suggesting where access to the production system doesn’t let you also access that secret?

Like I get in this specific case where you are running some untrusted code, that environment should have been isolated and these keys not passed in, but running untrusted code isn’t usually a common feature of most applications.

[Nextgrid]

If you actually have a business case for defense in depth (hint: nobody does - data breaches aren't actually an issue besides temporarily pissing off some nerds, as Equifax' and various companies stock prices demonstrate), what you'd do is have a proxy service who is entrusted with those keys and can do the operations on behalf of downstream services. It can be as simple as an HTTP proxy that just slaps the "Authorization" header on the requests (and ideally whitelists the URL so someone can't point it to https://httpbin.org/get and get the secret token echoed back).

This would make it so that even a compromised downstream service wouldn't actually be able to exfiltrate the authentication token, and all its misdeeds would be logged by the proxy service, making post-incident remediation easier (and being able to definitely prove whether anything bad has actually happened).

[roywiggins]

In this specific case running linters doesn't even need that much I think, it's never going to need to reach out to GitHub on its own, let alone Anthropic etc. The linter process likely doesn't even need network access, just stdout so you can gather the result and fire that back to GitHub or whenever it needs to go. Just executing it with an empty environment would have helped things (though obviously an RCE would still be bad)

[wahnfrieden]

It is a national security concern more than a business ownership & market concern

[Nextgrid]

Unless "national security" is going to either pay people proactively to pass gov-mandated pentests, or enforce actual, business-threatening penalties for breaches, it doesn't really matter from a company owner perspective. They're not secure, but neither are their competitors, so it's all good.

[morgante]

A pretty straightforward solution is to have an isolated service that keeps the private key and hands back the temporary per-repo tokens for other libraries to use. Only this isolated service has access to the root key, and it should have fairly strict rate limiting for how often it gives other services temporary keys.

[curuinor]

hey, this is Howon from CodeRabbit. We use a cloud-provider-provided key vault for application secrets, including GH private key.

[ipython]

This reply, while useful, only serves to obfuscate and doesn’t actually answer the question.

You can store the credentials in a key vault but then post them on pastebin. The issue is that the individual runner has the key in its environment variables. Both can be true- the key can be given to the runner in env and the key is stored in a key vault.

The important distinction here is - have you removed the master key and other sensitive credentials from the environment passed into scanners that come in contact with customer untrusted code??

[thyrfa]

Not at that time though, right, considering it was dumped? You have changed since, which is good, but under a year ago had it as just an env var