microsoft / microsoft/python-environment-tools
Make quality snapshot comments safe for fork PRs
Personne n'a encore pris cette issue.
- Langage dominant
- Rust
- Étoiles
- 207
- Forks
- 45
- Métriques de merge des PR
- Aucune PR mergée en 30 j
Description
Problem
Pull requests from forks receive a read-only GITHUB_TOKEN, even when a pull_request workflow declares pull-requests: write. The performance and coverage workflows currently invoke marocchino/sticky-pull-request-comment before running their substantive work.
PR #521 reproduced the failure across all performance and coverage jobs:
- the workflow token had
PullRequests: readandSecret source: None; - the initial sticky-comment step failed with
Resource not accessible by integration; - normal benchmark/coverage steps were then skipped because the preceding step failed;
always()upload/comparison steps ran withoutmetrics.jsonorlcov.info, producing cascading snapshot failures; and- the final sticky-comment step failed with the same permission error.
The regular build, test, lint, and environment jobs passed, confirming that this was a fork-permission failure rather than a problem with the action pins in PR #521.
Security constraint
Fork workflows must remain untrusted and read-only:
- do not grant fork pull requests write access or repository secrets;
- do not use
pull_request_targetto execute or otherwise consume untrusted pull-request code; and - do not weaken the fail-closed behavior of the actual performance and coverage gates.
Tasks
- Detect fork pull requests before invoking PR-comment-writing actions.
- Skip both in-progress and final sticky-comment steps when the token cannot write, while allowing the benchmark/coverage work and snapshot comparisons to continue.
- Ensure comment publishing itself is non-gating: a comment API failure must not suppress or replace the underlying quality-gate result.
- Preserve sticky performance and coverage comments for same-repository pull requests.
- Keep reports available to fork contributors through job summaries and uploaded artifacts.
- Audit other
pull_requestworkflows for write operations with the same fork-token assumption.
Acceptance criteria
- A fork PR runs the complete performance and coverage jobs using only a read-only token.
- Fork runs do not attempt to create or update PR comments and do not report
Resource not accessible by integration. - Performance or coverage regressions still fail their jobs for both fork and same-repository PRs.
- Missing or malformed benchmark/coverage output still fails closed.
- Same-repository PRs continue receiving sticky snapshot comments.
- Fork reports remain inspectable in the GitHub step summary and artifacts.
- The solution does not use
pull_request_target, expose secrets, or grant write permissions to untrusted fork code.
Reproduction
- PR: #521
- Performance run: https://github.com/microsoft/python-environment-tools/actions/runs/31991321814
- Coverage run: https://github.com/microsoft/python-environment-tools/actions/runs/31991321855
Guide de contribution
Aucun guide de contribution indexé pour ce dépôt
Par où commencer
- Lisez l'issue en entier, puis le guide de contribution du projet.
- Signalez en commentaire que vous la prenez — cela évite que deux personnes fassent le même travail.
- Forkez le dépôt et travaillez sur une branche.
- Ouvrez une pull request qui référence le numéro de l'issue.
Piste de recherche
Commencez par les workflows performance et coverage pull_request, en particulier leurs étapes in-progress et final marocchino/sticky-pull-request-comment. Utilisez PR #521 et les exécutions performance et coverage liées pour reproduire l’échec du token du fork. C’est terminé lorsque les jobs des forks s’exécutent avec un accès en lecture seule tandis que les gates restent fail-closed, que les commentaires dans le même dépôt continuent de fonctionner et que les rapports restent disponibles dans les résumés et les artefacts.
Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.
Évaluation
- Stack technique
- github-actions
- Domaine
- ci-cd, security
- Type d'issue
- Bug
- Difficulté
- 4/5
- Temps estimé
- 3-5 jours
- Activité
- Calme
- Clarté
- Plutôt claire
- Accessibilité débutants
- 65/100