AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Informational 18 Bitcoin

chore(ci): applying zizmor findings to UI flows workflow [no changelog]

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Michal Kazda

77/100 · Adequate
chore(ci): applying zizmor findings to UI flows workflow
[no changelog]
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope✓ Provides an explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit tightens two GitHub Actions workflow files that run translation-related UI tests. It moves broad workflow-level AWS login permission down to only the specific jobs that need it, stops Git from keeping reusable login credentials after checking out code, and replaces direct use of user-provided language input with an environment variable to reduce injection risks. These are defensive hardening changes rather than fixes for a known active attack.

Recommended action

Treat as routine CI hardening. Review that all jobs needing AWS OIDC have id-token: write, verify no other user inputs are directly interpolated into shell scripts, and consider running zizmor or a similar linter continuously on workflow changes.

Security signals we found

01

Workflow permission scope reduction (id-token: write moved to job level)

02

actions/checkout persist-credentials: false added

03

User-controlled workflow input (inputs.languages) moved to environment variable before shell interpolation

04

Artifact path changed to new build output location

05

Commit title references zizmor (GitHub Actions static analysis/hardening tool)

Risk score

Why this scored 18/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 2/30
Exploitability 2/25
Stealth signal 3/15
Affected reach 2/15
Confidence 6/10
Evidence quality 3/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.