Visitar URL original
Evaluate generation of aboms for ci/cd dependency analysis · Issue #665 · apache/infrastructure-actions · GitHub
Skip to content

Evaluate generation of aboms for ci/cd dependency analysis #665

Description

@dave2wave

I saw a note about Generating aboms on the OpenSSF slack. This tool may be a useful analysis gathering step in an atom analysis workflow.

Let's discuss.

Activity

  1. added
    enhancementNew feature or request
    dependenciesPull requests that update a dependency file
    gatewayThings related to the GitHub Actions allowlist gateway
    on Apr 4, 2026
  2. raboof commented on Apr 5, 2026

    @raboof
    Member

    While I find the whole 'everyone wants to be a BOM' thing a bit cringey, this might potentially be a neat tool to build #606 on top of.

  3. dave2wave commented on Apr 24, 2026

    @dave2wave
    MemberAuthor

    @potiuk For python and npm type actions the verify-action-build script could be enhanced to provide a list of dependencies. These should be saved somewhere so that we can easily scan for exposure to vulnerable components.

  4. potiuk commented on Apr 24, 2026

    @potiuk
    Member

    @potiuk For python and npm type actions the verify-action-build script could be enhanced to provide a list of dependencies. These should be saved somewhere so that we can easily scan for exposure to vulnerable components.

    I don't think we need that - if anything, we should refuse those deps (and we already do in some cases) where "dependencies" in those actions are not fixed (I think vast majority - if not all of our actions have a "pinned" lock file (package.lock/ uv.lock) that contains all dependencies.

    So rather than duplicating those we should reject those actions that do not have such a lock - because they are dangerous - as they can bring something we had no idea (and author of the action had no idea) at the time of release - this is what Astral does (I quoted their article recently) - ans this is what has been long requested from GitHub - they had "immutable" actions idea that they generally abandoned (for public actions). This has also been discussed by my friend - Andrew Nesbitt (from the OSS Corps of Security Enginers - https://nesbitt.io/2025/12/06/github-actions-package-manager.html - and I quite agree - everything in our actions should be "locked/pinned".

  5. potiuk commented on Apr 24, 2026

    @potiuk
    Member

    Also to add: the reason why not in verify - is because verify is "gating" tooll. Such a tool for abom storage should work when we merge somethign- not for everything. And it's a great oportunity for others to contribute.

    So we could have a separate action/tool for it - maybe someone wouid like to use it as an opportunity to test their claude skills and add it.

    I added the customary "good first issue" label - so now the issue is in this nice https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-actions/contribute page.

    If we do not give people chance to contribute and try to piggy-back into existing (somewhat) related things and peopel who usually look at them we will never grow community.

  6. potiuk commented on Apr 24, 2026

    @potiuk
    Member

    BTW: checking for existing lock files for all possible ecosystems is in #770

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    dependenciesPull requests that update a dependency fileenhancementNew feature or requestgatewayThings related to the GitHub Actions allowlist gatewaygood first issue

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions