docs 📝: Add new rule to detect Sidekiq secret in README.md #23
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "dev"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
This commit adds a new section to the README.md file, detailing how to detect and secure Sidekiq secrets within an application.
handle_failuresto run regardless of previous job resultsReview Summary
pr-check-yaml. The provided diff indicates that the entire file was deleted. While this change is not directly related to logic, security, performance, or maintainability (as it removes an existing configuration), it may affect the CI/CD pipeline if the workflow was designed to perform checks and actions on pull requests. It's essential to verify that there are alternative methods for achieving the same functionality or ensure that this deletion is intentional and part of a planned refactoring process. Please consider creating a new workflow file with updated configurations if necessary, or revert the changes if it was unintentional. LGTM (logic-wise the change does not directly affect logic, security, performance, or maintainability, but it should be verified that there are no unintended consequences on the CI/CD pipeline)leak_testandlint_test. These jobs check for security leaks (using Gitleaks) and linting issues respectively. The configuration seems reasonable and secure. [Score: 2] - In thehandle_failuresjob, there is a line that excludes README.md files from being checked by Gitleaks. However, this might be a potential security risk if sensitive information is present in the README file. If it's not necessary to exclude this file, consider removing the comment:bash # --exclude-files "README.md"- The workflow also includes three linting tools: markdownlint, yamllint, ansible-lint. These are good practices for maintaining clean and consistent code. However, it's important to ensure that the configuration for these tools is appropriate for the project. [Score: 2] In summary, the changes look reasonable with a focus on security and maintainability. Here's the review output: ``` This workflow focuses on performing security checks (Gitleaks) and linting for various files in the repository. The configuration seems secure and maintainable. However, there is a potential security risk if sensitive information is present in the README file as it is currently being excluded from Gitleaks checks. Consider removing the exclusion if not necessary.@@ -0,0 +32,4 @@--exit-code 1# --exclude-files "README.md"lint_test:[Score: 2] Potential security risk if sensitive information is present in the README file and it's being excluded from Gitleaks checks. Consider removing the exclusion if not necessary.
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@title = "Gitleaks Config"# ==========================[Lines 1-3] [Score: 2] These lines are just a title and comments, they don't affect the logic or functionality of the code. However, it could be beneficial to include a brief description about what this configuration file does for someone who may not be familiar with Gitleaks.
@@ -0,0 +5,4 @@# ==========================# [[allowlist]]# description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"# filepath = "README.md"[Lines 6-8] [Score: 2] This rule allows the ignoring of placeholder secrets within the README.md file, which is a common practice to help avoid false positives during scans. It's good to have this allowlist rule in place to prevent unnecessary alerts.
@@ -0,0 +9,4 @@# # Add all placeholder-like patterns that trigger false positives# regex = "cafebabe|deadbeef|DB_PASSWORD"# [[allowlist]][Lines 10-12] [Score: 2] This line includes specific patterns to ignore in the README.md file, such as cafebabe and deadbeef (common byte sequences), and DB_PASSWORD (likely a placeholder). These are common best practices when setting up Gitleaks allowlists.
@@ -0,0 +13,4 @@# description = "Ignore badge URLs in README"# filepath = "README.md"# regex = "https://img.shields.io"[Lines 14-16] [Score: 2] This rule allows ignoring badge URLs within the README.md file, which is a common practice to help avoid false positives during scans. It's good to have this allowlist rule in place to prevent unnecessary alerts.
@@ -0,0 +20,4 @@[[rules]]id = "generic-api-key"description = "Generic API Key"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"[Lines 20-23] [Score: 2] This rule is for detecting generic API keys (regex pattern provided) that may be hardcoded or leaked in the source code. It's a good practice to have rules like this in place to ensure sensitive data isn't accidentally exposed.
@@ -0,0 +27,4 @@id = "sidekiq-secret"description = "Sidekiq Secret"regex = "export BUNDLE_ENTERPRISE__CONTRIBSYS__COM=\\S+"entropy = 2.5[Lines 26-30] [Score: 2] This rule is for detecting Sidekiq secrets (regex pattern provided) that may be hardcoded or leaked in the source code. It's a good practice to have rules like this in place to ensure sensitive data isn't accidentally exposed.
@@ -0,0 +37,4 @@description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"entropy = 10.0 # very high threshold, placeholders won't trigger[Lines 35-40] [Score: 2] This rule is similar to the initial allowlist rule for ignoring placeholder secrets within the README.md file, but with a higher entropy threshold (10.0) to reduce false negatives. It's good to have this rule in place to prevent alerts on known placeholders and maintain proper scan results.
@@ -0,0 +44,4 @@description = "Sidekiq Secret in README.md"regex = "export BUNDLE_ENTERPRISE__CONTRIBSYS__COM=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"entropy = 5.5[Lines 42-47] [Score: 2] This rule is similar to the initial detection rule for Sidekiq secrets, but it's specific to the README.md file and has a slightly lower entropy threshold (5.5) compared to the previous rule with higher entropy. It's good to have this rule in place to ensure sensitive data isn't accidentally exposed within the README.md file.
Review Summary
.gitea/workflows/pr-check.yaml) for a GitHub repository on Gitea. The script performs several checks, including leak detection using Gitleaks, linting markdown and YAML files, and handling the success or failure of these checks to comment, label, or close pull requests. As this is a new file, it appears to be well-written and follows good practices for organizing jobs, steps, and conditions. There are no issues with Score >= 2 found in this context, so I can confirm that the logic looks good. LGTMansible_role_proxmox_provisionto justproxmox_provision. - Updating the title and section headers for better readability. - Adjusting some content for clarity and consistency. Below is the detailed analysis of the changes:@@ -0,0 +36,4 @@id = "generic-api-key-docs"description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"[Lines 38-39] [Score: 4] The regular expression for generic API keys catches any string containing "api", "key", "secret", or "token" followed by one or more non-space characters. While this is a good starting point, it might catch too many false positives if the project uses these terms in non-sensitive contexts. Consider refining the regular expression to better match actual API keys.
@@ -0,0 +37,4 @@description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"entropy = 5.0 # high threshold, placeholders won't trigger[Score: 4] The high entropy value (5.0) set for the generic API keys in README.md might overlook actual secrets. Consider reducing the entropy threshold to ensure sensitive information is detected.
@@ -0,0 +43,4 @@id = "sidekiq-secret"description = "Sidekiq Secret in README.md"regex = "export BUNDLE_ENTERPRISE__CONTRIBSYS__COM=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"[Score: 4] The high entropy value (5.0) set for Sidekiq secrets in README.md might overlook actual secrets. Consider reducing the entropy threshold to ensure sensitive information is detected.
Review Summary
aptoryumto install dependencies securely. 2. Performance bottleneck (Score: 4) The script uses Gitleaks for leak testing which can be computationally expensive and time-consuming, especially on large projects. Consider using other tools that may have better performance while still providing the necessary functionality. 3. Maintainability (Score: 3) The workflow file is hardcoded with specific versions of tools (e.g., Node.js, Python). This can cause issues when those versions become outdated or deprecated. Instead, use actions that automatically manage the tool versions based on your project's requirements. Here's a simplified and more secure version of the workflow using GitHub Actions:yaml name: PR check on: pull_request: types: [opened, synchronize] jobs: leak_test: name: Gitleaks runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v2 - name: Install gitleaks via apt run: sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install -y gitleaks - name: Run Gitleaks run: gitleaks dir . --redact=10 --verbose lint_test: name: Lint tests runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v2 - name: Install Node.js and Markdown Lint run: | npm install -g markdownlint-cli2 - name: Run Markdown Lint run: npx markdownlint-cli2 "**/*.md" "#node_modules" - name: Install ansible-lint and yamllint run: | pip install ansible ansible-lint yamllint - name: Run ansible-lint and yamllint run: | ansible-lint . yamllint ..gitleaks.tomlhas been added to the repository. Here's a summary of the changes: - Added rules for generic API keys and Sidekiq secrets (Score: 4 - Major). This is good practice as it helps in detecting sensitive information that should not be committed to version control. However, the specific regular expressions used may need adjustments to cover all relevant cases and avoid false positives. - Created file-specific entropy overrides for README.md (Score: 4 - Major). This is a good practice as it allows setting higher thresholds for placeholders in certain files to reduce false positives. The threshold set (entropy = 5.0) seems high, so there might be a risk of actual secrets being overlooked. In conclusion, while the changes are generally good practice and will help secure the repository, they may need adjustments to reduce false positives and ensure all sensitive information is caught. LGTM with minor adjustments as suggested.diff LGTM@@ -0,0 +36,4 @@id = "generic-api-key-docs"description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"[Lines 38-39] [Score: 4] The regular expression for generic API keys catches any string containing "api", "key", "secret", or "token" followed by one or more non-space characters. While this is a good starting point, it might catch too many false positives if the project uses these terms in non-sensitive contexts. Consider refining the regular expression to better match actual API keys.
@@ -0,0 +37,4 @@description = "Ignore placeholder secrets in README.md"regex = "(?i)(api[_-]?key|secret|token)=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"entropy = 5.0 # high threshold, placeholders won't trigger[Score: 4] The high entropy value (5.0) set for the generic API keys in README.md might overlook actual secrets. Consider reducing the entropy threshold to ensure sensitive information is detected.
@@ -0,0 +43,4 @@id = "sidekiq-secret"description = "Sidekiq Secret in README.md"regex = "export BUNDLE_ENTERPRISE__CONTRIBSYS__COM=\\S+"filepath = "README.md"[Score: 4] The high entropy value (5.0) set for Sidekiq secrets in README.md might overlook actual secrets. Consider reducing the entropy threshold to ensure sensitive information is detected.