feat(enrichment): scan Terraform .tfvars and HCL files for IaC misconfig

[jeffrey701]

CONFIG_PATH_RE already scanned .tf, but its extension group is end-anchored so .tfvars (terraform.tfvars / *.auto.tfvars) and .hcl (Packer/Nomad/Consul/Terraform) files ended after tf and never matched — scanIacMisconfig skipped these canonical IaC files entirely, so their CORS/TLS/open-ingress checks never ran. Adds tfvars + hcl to the group + extends the test with isRelevantConfigPath assertions. rees green (532).

[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 06:06:27 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 73/100 · CI pending · dirty

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This change fixes the path gate at the source: `scanIacMisconfig` already delegates file eligibility to `isRelevantConfigPath`, and adding `tfvars`/`hcl` to `CONFIG_PATH_RE` makes Terraform variable files and HCL-based IaC files reachable by the existing scanners. The added test exercises the actual exported gate that previously excluded these paths and keeps the existing `.tf` and negative `.ts` behavior covered. I do not see a reachable correctness regression in the visible diff.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• nit: review-enrichment/test/iac-misconfig.test.ts:6 says `.hcl` files “end after `tf`”, but `.hcl` was simply absent from the extension group; tighten that comment so the test documents the actual miss.
• review-enrichment/test/iac-misconfig.test.ts:5 could add one `scanIacMisconfig` assertion with a `.tfvars` file containing an existing misconfig pattern to cover the public analyzer entrypoint as well as the path predicate, though the current source-layer test covers the changed behavior.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
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 (no linked issue context).
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: 66 registered-repo PR(s), 35 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jeffrey701; Gittensor profile; 66 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: jeffrey701
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 66 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Explain no-issue PR.
• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.

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 is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (conflicts with the base branch — resolve and open a fresh PR). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.