feat(enrichment): detect Resend API keys and Mapbox secret tokens in secret-scan

[bohdansolovie]

Summary

• Add high-confidence secret-scan rules for Resend API keys (re_ + base62) and Mapbox secret access tokens (sk.eyJ + base64url body).
• Orb fix (follow-up to closed feat(enrichment): detect Resend API keys and Mapbox secret tokens in secret-scan #3266): Mapbox rule matches the production token shape (sk.eyJ + body) without requiring a fabricated second-dot JWT segment.

Motivation

Resend and Mapbox credentials are commonly leaked in env files and deployment configs.

Test plan

• Resend — positive match and truncated negative
• Mapbox secret — production-shaped sk.eyJ fixture, not Stripe, truncated negative, pk. public token negative
• Fragment-based fixtures (no contiguous fake secrets in source)
• Full secret-scan.test.ts suite passes (60 tests)

Made with Cursor

[superagent-security]

🚨 Contributor flagged. Click here for more info: Superagent Dashboard

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 00:00:02 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 80/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This change adds two focused high-confidence secret-scan rules and covers the intended positive/negative cases for Resend keys and Mapbox secret tokens. The Mapbox rule is correctly distinct from Stripe-style `sk_live_` / `sk_test_` keys and the tests exercise the production-shaped `sk.eyJ` prefix without inventing a second JWT segment. I do not see a reachable correctness defect in the visible diff.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• nit: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/secret-scan.ts:192 should probably treat `_` as an identifier continuation for Resend too, otherwise `re_aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa_suffix` is reported as a partial secret even though the matched literal is embedded in a larger identifier-like token.
• nit: review-enrichment/test/secret-scan.test.ts:474 would be stronger if the Resend fixture asserted the underscore-continuation negative case as well, matching the boundary behavior already tested for other secret formats.
• review-enrichment/src/analyzers/secret-scan.ts:192 consider changing the Resend boundary to `/(?![A-Za-z0-9_])/` unless Resend tokens can legally be followed by `_` in source without being part of the same token.
• review-enrichment/test/secret-scan.test.ts:489 add a Resend negative for `re_` + 24 chars + `_suffix` if you keep this precision-first scanner convention.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#3266
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	❌ 5/25	Preflight is holding this PR: the review lane is unavailable, so it is not ready for automated review.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 182 registered-repo PR(s), 102 merged, 9 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	bohdansolovie; Gittensor profile; 182 PR(s), 9 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: bohdansolovie
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: Python, C++, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 182 PR(s), 9 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[loopover-orb]

Gittensory approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.