Add Infisical Secrets Check Workflow

[guibranco]

Description

• Introduced a new GitHub Actions workflow to check for secrets in the repository using Infisical.
• The workflow runs on pull requests and can be triggered manually.
• It scans for secrets, generates reports, and uploads artifacts based on the scan results.
• Provides feedback directly in the PR comments regarding the presence of secrets.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files

Enhancement

infisical-secrets-check.yml Add Infisical Secrets Check Workflow                                          .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml Added a GitHub Actions workflow for Infisical secrets check. Configured jobs for scanning secrets and generating reports. Implemented artifact uploads for logs and results. Included conditional messages for PR updates based on scan results. +112/-0

Description by Korbit AI

Note

This feature is in early access. You can enable or disable it in the Korbit Console.

Create infisical-secrets-check.yml

This PR introduces a GitHub Actions workflow to automatically scan for secrets in the codebase using Infisical, and report the results back to the pull request.

The addition of this workflow aims to enhance security by ensuring that no sensitive information is inadvertently committed to the repository. The workflow runs on every pull request and manually via workflow_dispatch, and it generates a detailed report if any secrets are detected. This approach was chosen to automate the detection process and provide immediate feedback to developers, reducing the risk of secret leaks.

[senior-dev-bot]

Hi there! 👋 Thanks for opening a PR. It looks like you've already reached the 5 review limit on our Basic Plan for the week. If you still want a review, feel free to upgrade your subscription in the Web App and then reopen the PR

[semanticdiff-com]

Review changes with SemanticDiff.

[korbit-ai]

My review is in progress 📖 - I will have feedback for you in a few minutes!

[pr-code-reviewer]

👋 Hi there!

1. Specify the version of the actions/checkout action to use, rather than using v4 which may change.
2. Consider using environment variables or GitHub Secrets for sensitive information like API keys and passwords.
3. Add error handling and notifications in case any of the installation steps fail to ensure better feedback during workflow execution.

_{^{Automatically generated with the help of gpt-3.5-turbo.
Feedback? Please don't hesitate to drop me an email at [email protected].}}

[instapr]

Great work adding the Infisical secrets check workflow! I reviewed the PR and everything looks good. Let's merge it. 👍

[codara-ai-code-review]

Potential issues, bugs, and flaws that can introduce unwanted behavior:

1. /.github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml
   • In the Install tools step, the script is trying to run pip install csvkit, which is not a valid command for installing Python packages directly via pip in a bash script. It should use pip install csvkit instead of pip install csvkit.
   • The Run scan step might produce unpredictable behavior when running infisical scan --redact -f csv -r secrets-result-raw.csv 2>&1 | tee >(sed -r 's/\x1b\[[0-9;]*m//g' >secrets-result.log) due to potential errors in the output processing and redirection logic, which could lead to data loss or incorrect reports.

Code suggestions and improvements for better exception handling, logic, standardization, and consistency:

1. /.github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml
   • Consider adding more error handling and validation in the workflow steps to handle unexpected failures gracefully and provide more informative messages or actions.
   • Add comments to explain complex or critical parts of the workflow configuration for better maintainability and understanding by other team members.
   • Ensure consistency in the indentation and formatting throughout the workflow file to enhance readability and maintainability.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@guibranco has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 22 minutes and 36 seconds before requesting another review.

How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 992093f and 7b92e7d.

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
  • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[gooroo-dev]

Please double check the following review of the pull request:

Issues counts

🐞Mistake	🤪Typo	🚨Security	🚀Performance	💪Best Practices	📖Readability	❓Others
0	0	0	0	1	0	0

Changes in the diff

• ➕ Added a new GitHub Actions workflow for Infisical secrets check.
• ➕ The workflow triggers on workflow_dispatch and pull_request events.
• ➕ Configured concurrency to cancel in-progress runs for the same workflow and reference.
• ➕ Added a job to run on ubuntu-latest with specific permissions.
• ➕ Steps include checking out the repository, setting up Infisical package source, installing necessary tools, running the scan, generating a report, uploading artifacts, and updating the PR with a comment.

Identified Issues

ID	Type	Details	Severity	Confidence
1	💪Best Practices	Use specific versions for actions to ensure consistency and reliability	🟠Medium	🟠Medium

Issue Details and Fixes

Issue 1: Use specific versions for actions to ensure consistency and reliability

Details:

• File: .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml
• Lines: 17, 54, 66, 73, 80, 87
• Description: Using specific versions for GitHub Actions ensures that the workflow runs consistently and is not affected by breaking changes in the actions.

Fix:

-        uses: actions/checkout@v4
+        uses: actions/[email protected]

-        uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
+        uses: actions/[email protected]

-        uses: guibranco/[email protected]
+        uses: guibranco/[email protected]

-        uses: mshick/add-pr-comment@v2
+        uses: mshick/[email protected]

Explanation:

• Specified the exact versions for actions/checkout, actions/upload-artifact, guibranco/github-file-reader-action-v2, and mshick/add-pr-comment to ensure the workflow runs consistently and is not affected by future breaking changes.

Missing Tests

Since the changes are related to a GitHub Actions workflow, traditional unit tests are not applicable. However, the following steps can be taken to ensure the workflow functions correctly:

1. Manual Testing:

   • Trigger the workflow manually using workflow_dispatch to verify it runs without errors.
   • Create a pull request and ensure the workflow triggers and completes as expected.
   • Check that the PR comment is updated correctly based on the scan results.

2. Mock Testing:

   • Use a mock repository to test the workflow in a controlled environment.
   • Introduce known secrets in the mock repository to verify the detection and reporting functionality.

3. Review Logs:

   • Ensure the logs generated by the workflow steps provide sufficient information for debugging and verification.

By following these steps, the functionality and reliability of the new GitHub Actions workflow can be validated.

Summon me to re-review when updated! Yours, Gooroo.dev
Please add a reaction or reply to let me know your feedback.

[penify-dev]

PR Review 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	4, because the PR introduces a new GitHub Actions workflow with multiple steps and conditions, which requires careful examination to ensure all components work as intended and do not introduce any issues.
🧪 Relevant tests	No
⚡ Possible issues	Possible Bug: The workflow may not handle all edge cases, such as failures in the installation of the Infisical CLI or the scanning process. It's important to test these scenarios.
	Potential Performance Concern: The workflow runs on every pull request, which could lead to longer CI times if the repository has frequent updates.
🔒 Security concerns	No

[korbit-ai]

I have reviewed your code and did not find any issues!

---

Please note that I can make mistakes, and you should still encourage your team to review your code as well.

[penify-dev]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Robustness	Add error handling to the installation step to improve workflow robustness Consider adding error handling for the installation steps to ensure that the workflow fails gracefully if any of the installations do not succeed. .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml [32] -sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install -y infisical +sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install -y infisical || { echo "Infisical installation failed"; exit 1; } Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 Why: Adding error handling improves the robustness of the workflow by ensuring that failures during installation are properly reported and handled.	9
Error handling	Enhance the condition to check for file existence before processing It is advisable to check if secrets-result-raw.csv exists before attempting to process it to avoid potential errors. .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml [44] -if [[ -s secrets-result-raw.csv ]]; then +if [[ -f secrets-result-raw.csv && -s secrets-result-raw.csv ]]; then Suggestion importance[1-10]: 8 Why: Enhancing the condition to check for file existence prevents potential errors, making the workflow more reliable.	8
Maintainability	Specify a more stable version for the checkout action to prevent unexpected changes Consider using a more specific version tag for the actions used to ensure consistency and avoid breaking changes in future updates. .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml [21] -uses: actions/checkout@v4 +uses: actions/checkout@v2 Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Specifying a more stable version for the checkout action helps maintain consistency, though it is a minor improvement compared to error handling.	7
	Introduce a cleanup step to remove temporary files after the workflow execution It would be beneficial to add a cleanup step to remove any temporary files created during the workflow to keep the environment clean. .github/workflows/infisical-secrets-check.yml [110] -# No existing cleanup step +- name: Cleanup + run: | + rm -f secrets-result-raw.csv secrets-result.csv secrets-result.md Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 Why: Introducing a cleanup step is a good practice for maintainability, but it is not as critical as the other suggestions.	6

[github-actions]

Infisical secrets check: ✅ No secrets leaked!

Scan results:

11:51PM INF scanning for exposed secrets...
11:51PM INF 12 commits scanned.
11:51PM INF scan completed in 62.7ms
11:51PM INF no leaks found