ci(deps): add dependency-review PR gate#983
Merged
oskarszoon merged 2 commits intoMay 29, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
Benchmark Comparison ReportBaseline: Current: Summary
All benchmark results (sec/op)
Threshold: >10% with p < 0.05 | Generated: 2026-05-29 16:58 UTC |
adb1cdf to
4a6ec39
Compare
4a6ec39 to
7fec149
Compare
Contributor
|
🤖 Claude Code Review Status: Complete Current Review: This PR adds a solid dependency review workflow as a PR gate. The implementation is secure and follows best practices: Strengths:
One observation: The PR description notes that |
icellan
approved these changes
May 29, 2026
Collaborator
SPDX License Identifier CoverageThe deny list uses deprecated short-form SPDX identifiers: deny-licenses: GPL-2.0, GPL-3.0, AGPL-3.0SPDX deprecated these in favour of explicit variants. A dependency declaring Consider expanding to cover all variants: deny-licenses: >-
GPL-2.0-only, GPL-2.0-or-later,
GPL-3.0-only, GPL-3.0-or-later,
AGPL-3.0-only, AGPL-3.0-or-laterWorth verifying whether |
Contributor
Author
|
@ordishs verified against v5.0.0 Fixed in |
|
ordishs
approved these changes
May 29, 2026
ordishs
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved.
Verified both action pins by SHA: dependency-review-action is exactly v5.0.0 (latest v5 release), and checkout is v4.3.0 — the same SHA already used in docs-deploy.yml / claude-code-review.yml. Least-privilege permissions, correct use of pull_request (not pull_request_target), and the SPDX deny-list comment documents a real gotcha worth keeping.
Two operational notes (not code changes):
- Add
dependency-reviewas a required status check in branch protection, or it runs without blocking (already called out in the description). - Given the fork-based dev workflow,
comment-summary-in-prwon't post on fork PRs (read-only token capspull-requests: write). The gate still enforces via the check status — results just surface in the Checks tab rather than an inline comment. Correct security tradeoff; worth a line in team docs.
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.
What
Adds one blocking CI gate:
dependency-reviewon every PR. Fails a PR that adds a dependency with a ≥ high-severity CVE or a disallowed licence (GPL-2.0/3.0, AGPL-3.0). Diff-scoped — only the PR's added/changed deps, so it never trips on the existing backlog.Native Dependabot alerts notify on vulnerable deps but don't block merges — this enforces. That's the one gap in teranode's enterprise security stack.
Why just this
teranode's enterprise policy already provides, zero-config:
Evaluated and dropped as redundant / low-value:
/vNmodule paths (validated against this repo's deps).Action needed after merge
Add
dependency-reviewas a required status check in branch protection formain(Settings ▸ Branches) — that's what makes it enforce.Notes
dependency-review-actionpinned by commit SHA. The clean-PR run passes; blocking on a bad dep follows the action's standard behaviour (not exercised in this PR).