-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 821
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ci: Add cargo audit CI action #5160
Conversation
on: | ||
push: | ||
branches: | ||
- master |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not run this for pull requests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You mean to always run on PRs regardless of if they modified Cargo.toml files? My line of thinking was that only PRs that affect the dependencies should have this check run, to prevent an unrelated PR potentially being blocked.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Aah I see, perhaps we could also run on PRs that modify the CI configuration for this check. I mainly want to see this check running on this PR before I merge it 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah that's fair enough
I went and made some minor updates to descriptions in csv and json crate, hope that's fine
Looks like CI check indeed failed to startup, might have to include the steps to run cargo audit manually instead of relying on existing action from rustsec 🤔
Error: .github#L1
rustsec/[email protected] is not allowed to be used in apache/arrow-rs. Actions in this workflow must be:
within a repository owned by apache, created by GitHub, verified in the GitHub Marketplace, or matching the
following: */*@[a-f0-9][a-f0-9][a-f0-9][a-f0-9][a-f0-9][a-f0-9][a-f0-9]+, AdoptOpenJDK/install-jdk@*,
JamesIves/github-pages-deploy-action@5dc1d5a192aeb5ab5b7d5a77b7d36aea4a7f5c92, TobKed/label-when-approved-action@*,
actions-cool/issues-helper@*, actions-rs/*, al-cheb/configure-pagefile-action@*, amannn/action-semantic-pull-request@*,
apache/*, burrunan/gradle-cache-action@*, bytedeco/javacpp-presets/.github/actions/*, chromaui/action@*,
codecov/codecov-action@*, conda-incubator/setup-miniconda@*, container-tools/kind-action@*,
container-tools/microshift-action@*, dawidd6/action-download-artifact@*, delaguardo/setup-graalvm@*,
docker://jekyll/jekyll:*, docker://pandoc/core:2.9, eps1lon/actions-label-merge-conflict@*, gaurav-nelson/github-action-markdown-link-check@*,
gol...
Example run with a dependency with vulnerability: Run audit check step:
Subsequently fails. |
Example of a clean run:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me
I think this wins the prize for lowest ticket number closed in a long time 🏆 |
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #57
Rationale for this change
Audit dependencies for security vulns
What changes are included in this PR?
Use audit-check action in new CI step
Are there any user-facing changes?