mirror of
https://github.com/github/spec-kit.git
synced 2026-07-03 20:36:23 +08:00
f846d6526c
* fix(workflows): validate requires keys and reject phantom permissions gate A workflow's `requires` block was parsed but its keys were never validated, so a typo or an unsupported key was silently ignored. Most importantly, authors could write `requires.permissions.shell: true` expecting a runtime capability gate — but no such gate exists: a `shell` step always runs with the user's privileges. The declaration gave a false sense of sandboxing. `validate_workflow` now accepts only the recognised keys (`speckit_version`, `integrations`, `tools`, `mcp`) and rejects anything else, with an explicit error for `requires.permissions` pointing authors to `gate` steps for approval. Docs and the model comment are updated to state that `requires` is advisory, not a security boundary. - Reject non-mapping `requires`, unknown keys, and `requires.permissions` - Clarify workflows reference + PUBLISHING.md shell-step guidance - Tests for valid keys, non-mapping, unknown key, and permissions Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> Assisted-by: AI * fix(workflows): address review feedback on requires validation Follow-up to the review on #3079: - Guard `requires` validation on `is not None` instead of truthiness so a falsy non-mapping value (e.g. `requires: []` or `requires: ''`) is reported as an error instead of being silently skipped; `requires:` (YAML null) is still treated as an omitted block. Add a regression test. - Reword the workflows security note so `requires.permissions` is shown as rejected/unsupported rather than as a valid example of `requires`. - Standardize on US spelling (`_RECOGNIZED_REQUIRES_KEYS`, "recognized") to match the surrounding code and ease searching. - Tighten the permissions-rejection test to assert on specific message markers (`requires.permissions` and the `gate` guidance) so it fails if the validation path or wording drifts. Assisted-by: AI Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi (Architect AI) <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(workflows): scope requires validation to workflow keys (drop tools/mcp) tools and mcp belong to the bundle manifest requires schema (bundler/models/manifest.py, resolved in bundler/services/resolver.py), not the workflow requires validated here. Drop them from _RECOGNIZED_REQUIRES_KEYS and revert the PUBLISHING.md claim that this PR had introduced, so workflow requires only recognizes speckit_version and integrations. This keeps the existing docs accurate and resolves the inline doc-consistency review comments. Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> * refactor(workflows): type WorkflowDefinition.requires as Any pre-validation self.requires holds the raw parsed value, which before validate_workflow() runs may be a non-mapping (None for a bare 'requires:', a list for 'requires: []', etc.). Annotating it dict[str, Any] was misleading for editors/type-checkers; use Any and document that validate_workflow() enforces the mapping shape. Addresses Copilot review feedback on engine.py. Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> * fix(workflows): reject YAML-null requires: as a non-mapping Address Copilot review: validate requires the same way as inputs. A bare requires: parses as YAML null and was previously treated as an omitted block, which is inconsistent with inputs and lets a stray requires: line be silently ignored. Drop the is-not-None guard and check isinstance(..., dict) directly: an omitted block still defaults to {} (valid), but a present-but-non-mapping value -- YAML null, [] or '' -- is now an authoring error that surfaces. Tests: add YAML-null rejection + an omitted-is-still-valid guard test. Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> --------- Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Zied Jlassi (Architect AI) <6190550+zied-jlassi@users.noreply.github.com>