chore: Add supply-chain provenance guidance to agent skills - #6644
Open
antonis wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
chore: Add supply-chain provenance guidance to agent skills#6644antonis wants to merge 1 commit into
antonis wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Add a reference doc plus a code-guidelines rule and a review Correctness bullet so newly added or changed third-party references — npm deps, VS Code extension recommendations, GitHub Actions, and native deps — are verified as real artifacts under a trusted namespace before landing. Complements the shared getsentry/skills supply-chain coverage and adds the surface those miss (chiefly editor extensions), motivated by the nickelpack.oxlint case in #6640. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
Semver Impact of This PR⚪ None (no version bump detected) 📋 Changelog PreviewThis is how your changes will appear in the changelog.
🤖 This preview updates automatically when you update the PR. |
Contributor
antonis
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 1, 2026 10:05
geoffg-sentry
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2026
|
|
||
| ### Adding dependencies | ||
|
|
||
| When adding or changing any third-party reference — an npm dependency, a `.vscode/extensions.json` recommendation, a GitHub Action (`uses:`), or a native dependency (Podfile / Gemfile / Gradle) — verify it is published by its legitimate owner **before** referencing it. The tool being real is not enough: the *namespace* must be one the project trusts. Prefer Sentry's own scope/org (`@sentry/*`, `getsentry/*`), then the artifact's documented official publisher, and pin to an exact version / full commit SHA rather than a floating tag. Treat an unscoped or unfamiliar-publisher name as a supply-chain risk until proven otherwise — a claimable namespace lets an attacker ship code to every contributor. See [references/supply-chain.md](references/supply-chain.md) for the surface-by-surface checklist and verification commands. |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In regard to this line, what is a legitimate owner ? The package could come from a legitimate owner but their project/account got compromised, and a malicious release was made using the legitimate owner.
Might be worth to add something like, even if the third-party dependency comes from a legitimate owner, double check for any news that the given version is not malicious
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
📢 Type of change
📜 Description
Adds supply-chain / dependency-provenance guidance to the agent skills:
code-guidelines/references/supply-chain.md— new reference: the rule (a newly added/changed reference must be a real artifact and under a trusted namespace), a trust hierarchy (Sentry scope → official publisher → pinned ref), a per-surface table (npm,.vscodeextensions, GitHub Actions, iOS/Android native, Ruby), verification commands, and what existing checks (Dependabot / CodeQL / Warden) do and don't cover.code-guidelines/SKILL.md— an "Adding dependencies" rule pointing at the reference.review/SKILL.md— a "Supply-chain / dependency provenance" bullet in the Correctness axis.💡 Motivation and Context
Catch issues like #6640, where a recommended VS Code extension (
nickelpack.oxlint) pointed at a publisher namespace that isn't the tool's owner (oxc). The additive value over the sharedgetsentry/skillscoverage is provenance of newly introduced references and the surfaces those miss — chiefly editor extensions.💚 How did you test it?
Not runtime-testable (Markdown). Verified links resolve, the
.vscode/Dependabot claims match the repo, and the reference is cited from bothcode-guidelinesandreview.📝 Checklist
sendDefaultPIIis enabled.🔮 Next steps
Once #6643 merges, this PR's base auto-retargets to
main.