#68: proper ci cd for npm package publishing #2
Conversation
…ily updates for npm packages in various directories
… 2.0.0-alpha.1 feat(release): define package names and components in release main config file feat(release): set up configuration for automated versioning and release process
…pull request, and schedule events targeting main, develop, and release/* branches. Set permissions for job execution and analysis. Include steps to harden runner, checkout repository, initialize CodeQL, autobuild, and perform CodeQL analysis for javascript and typescript languages.
feat(workflows): configure release workflow to trigger on push to main, dev, and release branches feat(workflows): set permissions for contents to read and write in release job feat(workflows): add steps to harden runner for runtime security in release job feat(workflows): add release-please-action for automated releases in release job feat(workflows): add actions/checkout and actions/setup-node for release job setup feat(workflows): add pnpm installation and publishing steps in release job
…or Microsoft Defender For DevOps security checks
…workflow to scan and block PRs with known-vulnerable packages
…sing OSSAR feat(security-ossar.yml): integrate open source static analysis tools with GitHub code scanning feat(security-ossar.yml): schedule security scans on main, develop, and release branches
…y scorecard analysis to enhance supply-chain security monitoring and compliance with best practices
filtering for push and pull_request events to align with project requirements
WalkthroughThe recent updates to the Changes
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? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
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)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
|
@coderabbitai review |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (10)
- .github/dependabot.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/release/.release-manifest.json (1 hunks)
- .github/release/release-main-config.json (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build-test.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/codeql.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/management-changelog.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/security-defender-for-devops.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/security-dependency-review.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/security-ossar.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/security-scorecard.yml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .github/release/.release-manifest.json
Additional comments: 12
.github/release/release-main-config.json (1)
- 1-59: The configuration in
release-main-config.jsonappears well-structured and follows best practices for defining package names and components for a monorepo setup. It's good to see the use ofbump-minor-pre-major,bump-patch-for-minor-pre-major,sequential-calls, andseparate-pull-requestsflags, which can help in managing versioning and releases more effectively. The inclusion of a$schemaprovides a clear reference to the configuration schema, enhancing maintainability and correctness. Ensure that all package names and components listed are up-to-date and accurately reflect the current state of the monorepo..github/workflows/security-dependency-review.yml (1)
- 1-71: The workflow
security-dependency-review.ymlis well-structured and follows best practices for integrating dependency review into the CI/CD pipeline. Usingstep-security/harden-runnerenhances the security posture of the runner, which is commendable. The use ofactions/checkoutwithsubmodules: 'recursive'and a conditional token ensures that all necessary code, including submodules, is available for the dependency review. The explicit mention of aBOT_TOKENas a fallback forgithub.tokenis a good practice for scenarios where enhanced permissions are required. Ensure that theBOT_TOKENhas the minimal permissions necessary for its intended purposes to adhere to the principle of least privilege..github/workflows/build-test.yml (2)
- 11-23: The updated branch configurations in the
onsection ofbuild-test.ymlare a positive change, allowing for more granular control over when the workflow is triggered. Including branches likemain,develop,release/*, andv2ensures that the CI process runs on important branches, which is crucial for maintaining code quality across the project. This change aligns well with best practices for CI/CD pipelines.- 25-26: The addition of a
permissionssection withcontents: readis a good security practice, ensuring that the GitHub Actions runner has only the permissions it needs to perform its tasks. This principle of least privilege helps to minimize potential attack surfaces..github/workflows/management-changelog.yml (1)
- 1-103: The
management-changelog.ymlworkflow is comprehensive and well-structured, covering all necessary steps for a release workflow, including runner hardening, environment setup, and package publishing. The use ofstep-security/harden-runnerfor security,google-github-actions/release-please-actionfor automated release management, andactions/setup-nodefor environment setup are all best practices. The conditional steps based onsteps.release.outputs.release_createdensure that publishing actions are only taken when a new release is created, which is efficient and prevents unnecessary operations. Ensure that theNPM_TOKENandBOT_TOKENused in the workflow have the minimal permissions necessary for their purposes to adhere to the principle of least privilege..github/workflows/security-ossar.yml (1)
- 1-112: The
security-ossar.ymlworkflow effectively integrates open source static analysis tools for security scanning. The use ofstep-security/harden-runnerfor runner hardening andgithub/ossar-actionfor running the analysis are aligned with best practices for security workflows. The workflow's configuration to trigger onpush,pull_request, and a scheduled basis ensures comprehensive coverage across development activities. The permissions are appropriately scoped, withsecurity-events: writeallowing for the upload of SARIF results to the Security tab. It's important to regularly review and update the versions of actions used to ensure the latest features and security patches are applied..github/workflows/security-defender-for-devops.yml (1)
- 1-109: The
security-defender-for-devops.ymlworkflow is well-configured for integrating Microsoft Security DevOps (MSDO) into the CI/CD pipeline. The use ofstep-security/harden-runnerfor runner hardening andmicrosoft/security-devops-actionfor running MSDO analysis are aligned with best practices for security workflows. The workflow's configuration to trigger onpush,pull_request, and a scheduled basis ensures comprehensive coverage across development activities. The permissions are appropriately scoped, withsecurity-events: writeallowing for the upload of SARIF results to the Security tab. It's important to regularly review and update the versions of actions used to ensure the latest features and security patches are applied..github/workflows/codeql.yml (1)
- 1-114: The
codeql.ymlworkflow is effectively set up for running CodeQL analysis, a crucial step in identifying vulnerabilities within the codebase. The workflow's configuration to trigger onpush,pull_request, and a scheduled basis, along with the inclusion of amatrixstrategy for multiple languages, ensures comprehensive and flexible analysis coverage. The use ofstep-security/harden-runnerfor runner hardening and the specific setup for CodeQL analysis, including initialization and optional manual build steps, aligns with best practices for security workflows. The permissions are appropriately scoped, enhancing the security posture of the workflow. Regularly updating the versions of actions used is recommended to leverage the latest features and security improvements..github/dependabot.yml (2)
- 1-36: The header comments provide a comprehensive overview of the project, including links to the contributing guidelines and code of conduct. This is good practice for open-source projects, ensuring contributors are aware of the project's standards and expectations.
- 39-156: The configuration for Dependabot is well-structured, specifying automated dependency updates for npm packages across various directories and for GitHub Actions. Each configuration block correctly specifies the package ecosystem, update schedule, commit message format, and target directory. This setup ensures that dependencies are kept up-to-date, which is crucial for maintaining the security and reliability of the project.
One minor suggestion is to ensure consistency in the scheduling of updates across different ecosystems. Currently, all updates are scheduled daily at 02:00, which is generally a good practice. However, for larger projects or in cases where frequent updates might cause disruption, consider adjusting the schedule to a less frequent interval for certain packages or ecosystems, based on their stability and update frequency.
Additionally, the use of the
:arrow_up: maintprefix in commit messages is a clear and concise way to indicate maintenance updates. Including the scope in the commit message is also beneficial for quickly identifying the affected area of the project from the commit history..github/workflows/security-scorecard.yml (2)
- 1-36: The header comments in the security-scorecard.yml file, similar to the dependabot.yml file, provide a thorough introduction to the project, including important links and licensing information. This consistency across workflow files is excellent for maintaining a clear and informative codebase, especially for new contributors.
- 41-117: The workflow configuration for the Security - Scorecard supply-chain security analysis is well-defined, with clear triggers for branch protection rules, scheduled runs, and pushes to the main and develop branches. This ensures that the security analysis is performed regularly and in response to significant changes in the codebase.
The steps within the workflow are logically ordered and include best practices such as hardening the runner and telemetry for monitoring the workflow's performance. The use of specific versions for GitHub Actions (e.g.,
step-security/harden-runner@eb238b55efaa70779f274895e782ed17c84f2895) is a good practice to ensure stability and predictability of the workflow runs.However, there's a minor point to consider regarding the use of a personal access token (PAT) referred to as
BOT_TOKENfor actions such as checking out the repository and running the analysis. While using a PAT can provide necessary permissions for certain operations, it's important to ensure that the token's scope is limited to the minimum required permissions to reduce security risks. Additionally, storing the token securely as a GitHub secret and auditing its usage regularly is crucial for maintaining the security of the project.Lastly, the decision to optionally upload the results as artifacts and to GitHub's code scanning dashboard is a good practice, providing flexibility in how the analysis results are reviewed and acted upon.
|
FYI - If looking at PR for security steps - License compliance & dependency-review workflows failed with expected reasons due to the fork nature - these won't be effected on the main repo |
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Chores
Documentation