Skip to content

Remove compromised GH action #1714

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 23, 2025
Merged

Remove compromised GH action #1714

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 23, 2025

Conversation

alexeyr-ci2
Copy link
Collaborator

@alexeyr-ci2 alexeyr-ci2 commented Mar 15, 2025

Pull Request checklist

  • [ ] Add/update test to cover these changes
  • [ ] Update documentation
  • [ ] Update CHANGELOG file

This change is Reviewable

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Chores
    • Enhanced our automation process to more accurately detect code changes, ensuring that subsequent steps run only when relevant modifications are made.
    • Updated the numerical evaluation in our browser version check for improved reliability.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 15, 2025

Walkthrough

The workflow file has been updated to replace the previous action-based change detection with a custom shell script. The new script uses git diff to determine file changes between commits, specifically checking in the lib/generators/ and rakelib directories. Additionally, the numeric comparison for the installed Chrome version has been corrected from < to -lt. These changes adjust the control flow by setting an output variable that influences subsequent workflow steps.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
.github/workflows/examples.yml Replaced tj-actions/changed-files@v44 with a custom shell script using git diff for detecting changes in specific directories; updated numeric operator from < to -lt in Chrome version check.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Runner as GitHub Runner
    participant Script as Custom Shell Script
    participant Steps as Workflow Steps

    Runner->>Script: Execute git diff to check for changes
    Script-->>Runner: Return ANY_CHANGED=true/false
    alt ANY_CHANGED true
        Runner->>Steps: Run dependent workflow steps
    else ANY_CHANGED false
        Runner->>Steps: Skip dependent workflow steps
    end
Loading

Suggested reviewers

  • Judahmeek

Poem

Hop, hop, hooray for code anew,
A custom script now leads the queue!
Git diff checks with a gentle prance,
And -lt makes numbers dance.
This rabbit sings—let's give it a chance!


🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/examples.yml (1)

24-36: Replace the compromised action with a custom diff check
The new shell script correctly uses git diff to detect changes across the specified paths and sets the ANY_CHANGED flag accordingly. To improve robustness, consider adding error handling (for example, a set -e at the start of the script) to ensure that any errors in the diff command cause an immediate failure rather than proceeding with possibly invalid output.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between a877c76 and 303d237.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/examples.yml (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (5)
  • GitHub Check: dummy-app-integration-tests (oldest)
  • GitHub Check: dummy-app-integration-tests (newest)
  • GitHub Check: rspec-package-tests (oldest)
  • GitHub Check: rspec-package-tests (newest)
  • GitHub Check: build

@alexeyr-ci alexeyr-ci force-pushed the alexeyr/fix-ci-changed-files branch 2 times, most recently from 446df53 to 460fd1d Compare March 22, 2025 06:21
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/examples.yml (1)

24-37: Robustness Improvement: Enhance Error Handling in Changed Files Script

The custom shell script accurately replaces the compromised GitHub action by using git diff to detect changes. To further improve its reliability, consider adding error handling (for example, by using set -euo pipefail) at the beginning of the script. This will ensure that any failure (such as in git fetch or git diff) is immediately caught, preventing the script from continuing with an unexpected state.

Below is a diff suggestion for integrating this improvement:

-        run: |
-          git fetch origin ${{ github.event.base_ref }}
-          CHANGED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only ${{ github.event.base_ref }} ${{ github.sha }} -- \
-            lib/generators/ \
-            rakelib/example_type.rb \
-            rakelib/example_config.yml \
-            rakelib/examples.rake \
-            rakelib/run_rspec.rake)
-          if [ -n "$CHANGED_FILES" ]; then
-            ANY_CHANGED=true
-          else
-            ANY_CHANGED=false
-          fi
-          echo "any_changed=$ANY_CHANGED" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
+        run: |
+          set -euo pipefail
+          git fetch origin ${{ github.event.base_ref }}
+          CHANGED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only ${{ github.event.base_ref }} ${{ github.sha }} -- \
+            lib/generators/ \
+            rakelib/example_type.rb \
+            rakelib/example_config.yml \
+            rakelib/examples.rake \
+            rakelib/run_rspec.rake)
+          if [ -n "$CHANGED_FILES" ]; then
+            ANY_CHANGED=true
+          else
+            ANY_CHANGED=false
+          fi
+          echo "any_changed=$ANY_CHANGED" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2f12d44 and 460fd1d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • .github/workflows/examples.yml (2 hunks)
  • lib/generators/react_on_rails/dev_tests_generator.rb (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • lib/generators/react_on_rails/dev_tests_generator.rb
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/examples.yml (1)

88-89: Correct Numeric Comparison for Chrome Version

The update to using the numeric -lt operator in the version check for Google Chrome is a sound improvement—this operator correctly compares numeric values, ensuring proper detection of versions below the set minimum.

@alexeyr-ci alexeyr-ci force-pushed the alexeyr/fix-ci-changed-files branch 2 times, most recently from 023b364 to 7cf77f2 Compare March 22, 2025 06:34
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
.github/workflows/examples.yml (2)

24-38: Custom Changed-Files Detection Script
The new shell script block correctly replaces the compromised GitHub action by using git diff to detect changes in the specified paths. It sets the ANY_CHANGED flag appropriately based on whether any changes were found. One suggestion is to add a safeguard or log an error if BASE_SHA is unexpectedly empty; this can help diagnose issues in non-PR scenarios.


1-106: Reminder: Address Pending Checklist Items
The PR checklist indicates that tests, documentation updates, and the CHANGELOG have not been updated. While the workflow changes meet the technical requirements for replacing the compromised action, please consider adding the corresponding tests and documentation updates to ensure completeness of the PR.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 460fd1d and 7cf77f2.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/examples.yml (2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: dummy-app-integration-tests (oldest)
  • GitHub Check: dummy-app-integration-tests (newest)
  • GitHub Check: build
  • GitHub Check: rspec-package-tests (newest)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
.github/workflows/examples.yml (1)

89-89: Correct Numeric Comparison for Chrome Version
Changing the comparison operator to -lt ensures a proper numeric evaluation of the installed Chrome version. This fixes the potential bug from using a string comparison operator and helps avoid unexpected behavior in the version check.

@Judahmeek Judahmeek merged commit 99a2d71 into master Mar 23, 2025
11 checks passed
@Judahmeek Judahmeek deleted the alexeyr/fix-ci-changed-files branch March 23, 2025 00:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants