POST /orgs/{org}/code-security/configurations returns HTTP 500 when secret_scanning_delegated_bypass_options.reviewers is included

[casey-robertson-paypal]

🏷️ Discussion Type

Bug

💬 Feature/Topic Area

API

Body

Summary

Creating an organization code security configuration via POST /orgs/{org}/code-security/configurations returns HTTP 500 (empty body) when the request includes secret_scanning_delegated_bypass_options.reviewers — even though the configuration is successfully created. The identical request without the reviewers block returns 201, and adding the same reviewers via a follow-up PATCH returns 200. So only the create-with-reviewers path is affected.

Reproduced against GitHub Enterprise Cloud as of June 2026. (Note: this path appears to have worked previously, so this may be a regression.)

Expected behavior

POST with valid secret_scanning_delegated_bypass_options.reviewers should return 201 Created with the configuration body — the same as creating it without reviewers, or as the equivalent PATCH.

Actual behavior

500 Internal Server Error with an empty response body. The configuration is nonetheless created server-side, so a client that treats the 500 as a failure (and retries, as many HTTP clients do for 5xx) then hits 422 "Name has already been taken" on the retry and is left with an orphaned configuration.

Reproduction

Using a token with admin:org (or fine-grained Administration: write) on the target org, and a real team in that org:

ORG="your-org"
TOKEN="***"
TEAM_ID=$(gh api -X POST "orgs/$ORG/teams" -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" -f name="bypass-reviewers" --jq '.id')

# (A) create WITH reviewers -> 500 (but the config is created)
curl -sS -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  "https://api.github.com/orgs/$ORG/code-security/configurations" \
  -d "{\"name\":\"repro-with-reviewers\",\"advanced_security\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning_push_protection\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning_delegated_bypass\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning_delegated_bypass_options\":{\"reviewers\":[{\"reviewer_id\":$TEAM_ID,\"reviewer_type\":\"TEAM\"}]}}"
# -> 500

# (B) identical request WITHOUT the reviewers block -> 201
curl -sS -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" -X POST \
  -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  "https://api.github.com/orgs/$ORG/code-security/configurations" \
  -d "{\"name\":\"repro-no-reviewers\",\"advanced_security\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning_push_protection\":\"enabled\",\"secret_scanning_delegated_bypass\":\"enabled\"}"
# -> 201

# (C) PATCH the (B) config to ADD the same reviewers -> 200
#     (CONFIG_ID from the 201 response of B)
curl -sS -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" -X PATCH \
  -H "Authorization: token $TOKEN" -H "Accept: application/vnd.github+json" \
  "https://api.github.com/orgs/$ORG/code-security/configurations/CONFIG_ID" \
  -d "{\"secret_scanning_delegated_bypass_options\":{\"reviewers\":[{\"reviewer_id\":$TEAM_ID,\"reviewer_type\":\"TEAM\"}]}}"
# -> 200

Request	Result
Create with delegated_bypass_options.reviewers	500 (empty body) — config still created
Create without reviewers	201 Created
Update (PATCH) to add the same reviewers	200 OK

Impact

Any API client that sends reviewers in the create request hits the 500. Clients that retry 5xx then get a confusing 422 duplicate-name error plus an orphaned configuration. The current workaround is to create the configuration first and set reviewers in a separate PATCH.

Environment

• GitHub Enterprise Cloud, observed June 2026
• X-Github-Api-Version: 2022-11-28
• Reproduced with plain curl (no SDK involved)

[github-actions[bot]]

💬 Your Product Feedback Has Been Submitted 🎉

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us! Your feedback is invaluable as we build a better GitHub experience for all our users.

Here's what you can expect moving forward ⏩

• Your input will be carefully reviewed and cataloged by members of our product teams. 
  • Due to the high volume of submissions, we may not always be able to provide individual responses.
  • Rest assured, your feedback will help chart our course for product improvements.
• Other users may engage with your post, sharing their own perspectives or experiences. 
• GitHub staff may reach out for further clarification or insight. 
  • We may 'Answer' your discussion if there is a current solution, workaround, or roadmap/changelog post related to the feedback.

Where to look to see what's shipping 👀

• Read the Changelog for real-time updates on the latest GitHub features, enhancements, and calls for feedback.
• Explore our Product Roadmap, which details upcoming major releases and initiatives.

What you can do in the meantime 💻

• Upvote and comment on other user feedback Discussions that resonate with you.
• Add more information at any point! Useful details include: use cases, relevant labels, desired outcomes, and any accompanying screenshots.

As a member of the GitHub community, your participation is essential. While we can't promise that every suggestion will be implemented, we want to emphasize that your feedback is instrumental in guiding our decisions and priorities.

Thank you once again for your contribution to making GitHub even better! We're grateful for your ongoing support and collaboration in shaping the future of our platform. ⭐