docker / docker/github-builder

Question on verification target

Offen
#153 0 Kommentare 1 Reaktion 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen

Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.

Vorherrschende Sprache
Keine Sprachdaten
Sterne
83
Forks
23
Ø Merge
2 T. 22 Std.
Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
8

Beschreibung

Hi, and thanks a lot for this useful action 🙂 .

I was experimenting a bit with it and I have a question. From an end-user perspective, i.e., someone who is about to pull an image and use it locally, what's the recommended flow to verify it? I see there's an independent workflow for verifying images (docker/github-builder/.github/workflows/verify.yml@v1), but I'd like some help to understand what is it verifying, and how one can simulate it locally.

For example, I've built ghcr.io/apyrgio/dangerzone-test-github-builder@sha256:8eb497e92ed7071fc925e306214a6368bb2a3c90939ce15123d09471d3ba5a66 using this workflow.

Looking at the build job of this workflow, in the "Set result output" step, I see the following build output:

{
  "verifyCommands": "cosign verify --experimental-oci11 --new-bundle-format --certificate-oidc-issuer https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com/ --certificate-identity-regexp ^https://github.com/docker/github-builder/.github/workflows/build.yml.*$ ghcr.io/apyrgio/dangerzone-test-github-builder@sha256:c40cc89132c63ef82310cf1a2c05a6ad656ec88b9a9d29246825b470f1354a57",
  "imageDigest": "sha256:8eb497e92ed7071fc925e306214a6368bb2a3c90939ce15123d09471d3ba5a66",
  "artifactName": "",
  "signed": true
}

It seems that the verifyCommands field includes the commands that a user can run locally to verify the container image. What I'm not sure about is what we are verifying here.

In this case, the cosign verify command verifies the sha256:c40cc89132c63ef82310cf1a2c05a6ad656ec88b9a9d29246825b470f1354a57 manifest, which includes an in-toto attestation for the sha256:37ca0e50004ab4b4a51e6f87e6d9528a7d000e0a3702ff0a3c59181f7a558443 manifest, which is basically the image data for the linux/amd64 platform.

But the user will not pull this digest. They will instead pull either the root one, the platform specific one, or the image tag. For all the above, if they to run cosign verify ... against them, they will get the following:

Error: no signatures found
error during command execution: no signatures found

Should there be signatures for these digests?

Finally, the provided cosign verify ... command ensures that the image was created by this GitHub action. What's much more interesting though is the other attestation attributes, such as the repository or the source commit hash. If a user wants to verify against those, should they use the cosign verify ... command, or switch to cosign verify-attestation ... and pass a CUE policy or similar?

Beitragsleitfaden

Beitragsleitfaden öffnen

Erste Schritte

  1. Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
  2. Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
  3. Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
  4. Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.

Rechercherichtung

Beginne mit docker/github-builder/.github/workflows/verify.yml@v1 und dem Schritt „Set result output“ des build-Jobs in .github/workflows/github-build.yml. Verfolge die ausgegebenen verifyCommands sowie die Image-, Plattform- und Attestation-Digests und dokumentiere anschließend den empfohlenen lokalen Verifizierungsablauf und wie Benutzer Repository- oder Source-Commit-Attribute verifizieren sollten. Als erledigt gilt die Aufgabe, wenn das Digest-Verhalten und die Auswahl zwischen den cosign-Verifizierungsbefehlen klar erklärt sind.

Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.

Bewertung

Tech-Stack
docker, github-actions
Bereich
devops, security
Issue-Typ
Dokumentation
Schwierigkeit
4/5
Geschätzter Aufwand
3-5 Tage
Aktivitätsstatus
Veraltet
Klarheit
Muss geklärt werden
Anfängerfreundlichkeit
38/100

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.