supply-chain
Skill71 starsChanged 8 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Secure the software supply chain from source to running container. Covers Cosign keyless image signing (Sigstore/Rekor), SBOM generation and attestation (Syft), vulnerability scanning with severity gates (Trivy/Grype), SLSA Level 2 provenance, and Kyverno/OPA admission enforcement. All open-source, no license cost. Use when asked to "sign my image", "generate an SBOM", "scan for CVEs", "attest build provenance", "enforce image signatures in Kubernetes", or "implement SLSA".
- Reads credentials
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.
8
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 16
When invoked with no arguments, ask before proceeding:
- Distinctive: line 48
Ask for or read: the GitHub Actions workflow file(s), any existing image scanning steps, and any Kyverno/OPA admission policies
- Distinctive: line 91
Never store signing keys in CI secrets — use keyless only
- Distinctive: line 92
Always sign the digest, not the tag
- Distinctive: line 102
Add the SBOM generation step after build and push (digest is only available after registry push):
- Distinctive: line 130
Add a CVE vulnerability scan with a configurable severity gate that fails the build.
- Distinctive: line 133
Add Trivy scan step:
- Distinctive: line 166
Ask: keyless (Sigstore) or key-based signing?
- Very specific: line 257
After completing this task, log errors and learnings via /platform-skills:self-improve log.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Secure the software supply chain — from the build pipeline to running containers.
Interactive Wizard (fires when no arguments are provided)
When invoked with no arguments, ask before proceeding:
Q1 — Mode?
What do you need?
1. audit — review an existing CI/CD pipeline for supply chain security gaps
2. sign — set up keyless image signing with Cosign (Sigstore/Rekor, no key management)
3. sbom — generate and attest an SBOM with Syft
4. scan — add a CVE vulnerability gate with Trivy or Grype
5. enforce — write a Kyverno policy to block unsigned images at admission
6. slsa — generate a SLSA Level 2 provenance workflow
Enter 1–6 or mode name:Q2 — Context (after mode selected, one at a time):
- audit:
Paste your GitHub Actions workflow file(s) or describe your current CI/CD pipeline: - sign:
Which container registry? (ECR / GHCR / Docker Hub / other): - sbom:
Which image and registry? (e.g. ghcr.io/org/image): - scan:
Which scanner preference? Trivy (recommended) or Grype — or no preference: - enforce:
Which registry or image prefix should the policy cover? (e.g. ghcr.io/myorg/*): - slsa:
Which registry and repo? (e.g. ghcr.io/org/image from github.com/org/repo):
Then proceed into the relevant mode below.
Mode: audit
Review an existing CI/CD pipeline and cluster admission configuration for supply chain security gaps.
Steps:
- Ask for or read: the GitHub Actions workflow file(s), any existing image scanning steps, and any Kyverno/OPA admission policies
- Classify gaps by severity:
- Critical: images pushed without signing, no CVE gate, unsigned images admitted to cluster
- High: SBOM not generated or not attested, severity gate only on CRITICAL (misses HIGH)
- Medium: action versions pinned to tag not SHA, no SLSA provenance
- Output a prioritised gap list:
[CRITICAL] No image signing — any image can be admitted to the cluster [CRITICAL] No CVE severity gate — vulnerable images pass CI [HIGH] No SBOM attestation — cannot audit what is running [MEDIUM] Action versions pinned to tag, not SHA - Recommend the fix order: sign → scan-gate → SBOM → enforce → SLSA
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → Gap classification, Fix order
Mode: sign
Set up keyless image signing with Cosign using Sigstore/Rekor (no key management required).
Steps:
- Confirm the image registry (ECR, GHCR, Docker Hub) and CI platform (GitHub Actions assumed)
- Generate the signing workflow step:
- name: Install Cosign uses: sigstore/cosign-installer@11086d9f32b178aa24e93c2b86eba3ef4b16b68a # v3.8.1 - name: Sign image run: | cosign sign --yes \ ${{ env.REGISTRY }}/${{ env.IMAGE_NAME }}@${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} - Explain the keyless flow: GitHub Actions OIDC token → Fulcio CA → Rekor transparency log
- Show verification command:
cosign verify \ --certificate-identity-regexp="https://github.com/<org>/<repo>/.github/workflows/.*" \ --certificate-oidc-issuer="https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com" \ ghcr.io/<org>/<image>@<digest> - Flag: always sign the digest (
@sha256:…), never the tag — tags are mutable
Key rules:
- Never store signing keys in CI secrets — use keyless only
- Always sign the digest, not the tag
- Pin
cosign-installerto a full SHA, e.g.:sigstore/cosign-installer@11086d9f32b178aa24e93c2b86eba3ef4b16b68a
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → Keyless signing, Rekor transparency log
Mode: sbom
Generate a Software Bill of Materials with Syft and attest it as an OCI artifact alongside the image.
Steps:
- Add the SBOM generation step after build and push (digest is only available after registry push):
- name: Generate SBOM uses: anchore/sbom-action@61119d458adab75f756bc0b9e4bde25725f86a7a # v0.20.0 with: image: ${{ env.REGISTRY }}/${{ env.IMAGE_NAME }}@${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} format: spdx-json output-file: sbom.spdx.json - name: Attest SBOM run: | cosign attest --yes \ --predicate sbom.spdx.json \ --type spdxjson \ ${{ env.REGISTRY }}/${{ env.IMAGE_NAME }}@${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} - Show how to retrieve the SBOM attestation:
cosign download attestation \ --predicate-type https://spdx.dev/Document \ ghcr.io/<org>/<image>@<digest> | jq '.payload | @base64d | fromjson' - Note: use
spdx-jsonformat for broadest tooling compatibility;cyclonedx-jsonis an alternative
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → SBOM formats, Syft, Attestation
Mode: scan
Add a CVE vulnerability scan with a configurable severity gate that fails the build.
Steps:
- Add Trivy scan step:
- name: Scan image for vulnerabilities uses: aquasecurity/trivy-action@18f2135c0b15d26b3a4c2efded75e06b6f0e4884 # v0.30.0 with: image-ref: ${{ env.REGISTRY }}/${{ env.IMAGE_NAME }}@${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} format: table exit-code: '1' ignore-unfixed: true vuln-type: os,library severity: CRITICAL,HIGH - Explain
ignore-unfixed: true— skip CVEs with no fix available (reduces noise without reducing security) - For Grype (alternative), show:
- name: Scan with Grype uses: anchore/scan-action@e1165082ffb1fe366ebaf02d8526e7c4989ea9d2 # v7.4.0 with: image: ${{ env.REGISTRY }}/${{ env.IMAGE_NAME }}@${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} fail-build: true severity-cutoff: high - Recommend Trivy for new setups (CNCF, single binary, SBOM support); Grype for teams already using Syft
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → Trivy vs Grype, Severity gates
Mode: enforce
Generate a Kyverno ImageValidatingPolicy that blocks unsigned or unverified images at admission time.
Finding where unsigned images already run: Kubescape reports them as control C-0237 "Check if signature exists" (/platform-skills:kubescape-operator, or kubescape scan control C-0237 on a cluster). Use that list to size the rollout before switching the policy to Deny.
Steps:
- Ask: keyless (Sigstore) or key-based signing?
- For keyless, generate:
apiVersion: policies.kyverno.io/v1 kind: ImageValidatingPolicy metadata: name: require-signed-images spec: validationActions: [Audit] # switch to [Deny] after all images are signing matchConstraints: resourceRules: - apiGroups: [""] apiVersions: ["v1"] operations: ["CREATE", "UPDATE"] resources: ["pods"] matchImageReferences: - glob: "ghcr.io/<org>/*" validations: - expression: > images.containers.map(image, verifyImageSignatures(image, [{"keyless": { "url": "https://fulcio.sigstore.dev", "rekor": {"url": "https://rekor.sigstore.dev"}, "identities": [{"issuer": "https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com", "subjectRegExp": "https://github.com/<org>/.*"}] }}])).all(e, e > 0) message: "Image must be signed via Sigstore keyless signing from GitHub Actions" - Show audit-first deployment:
spec: validationActions: [Audit] # start here, switch to [Deny] after validation - Cross-reference:
/platform-skills:kyvernofor full ImageValidatingPolicy guidance
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → Kyverno enforcement, references/kyverno.md → ImageValidatingPolicy
Mode: slsa
Generate a GitHub Actions workflow for SLSA Level 2 provenance using slsa-github-generator.
Steps:
- Explain what SLSA L2 gives: signed provenance linking the artifact to the specific build inputs (source commit, workflow, runner)
- Generate the workflow using the official reusable workflow:
jobs: build: runs-on: ubuntu-latest outputs: digest: ${{ steps.build.outputs.digest }} permissions: contents: read packages: write steps: - name: Build and push image id: build uses: docker/build-push-action@48aba3b46d1b1fec4febb7c5d0c644b249a11355 # v6.10.0 with: push: true tags: ghcr.io/<org>/<image>:${{ github.sha }} provenance: needs: build permissions: actions: read id-token: write packages: write uses: slsa-framework/slsa-github-generator/.github/workflows/generator_container_slsa3.yml@5a775b367a56d5bd118a224a811bba288150a563 # v2.0.0 with: image: ghcr.io/<org>/<image> digest: ${{ needs.build.outputs.digest }} registry-username: ${{ github.actor }} secrets: registry-password: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} - Show provenance verification:
slsa-verifier verify-image \ ghcr.io/<org>/<image>@<digest> \ --source-uri github.com/<org>/<repo> \ --source-branch main - Note:
generator_container_slsa3.ymlproduces L2 provenance by default; L3 requires hermetic builds not available on standard GitHub-hosted runners
Reference: references/supply-chain.md → SLSA levels, slsa-github-generator
Signing and SBOMs cover what the pipeline produces. They say nothing about the pipeline itself — an unpinned uses: or a pull_request_target checkout of untrusted code compromises the build before any artifact exists. To audit the workflows that run this supply chain, including unpinned-uses hash-pin policy enforcement, use /platform-skills:zizmor. They also say nothing about whether a credential leaked into the repo that produces this artifact in the first place — for that, live-validate and revoke with /platform-skills:kingfisher.
After completing this task, log errors and learnings via /platform-skills:self-improve log.
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 7
- daloopa/investing★ 488same name
- padamson/playwright-rust★ 161same name
- nimadorostkar/Claude-Skills-collection★ 33same name
- thejefflarson/soundcheck★ 20same name
- poorvith-mp/skills-business★ 1same name
- conjure-3301/skills★ 0same name
- kapadias/nonna★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository59 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- .cursor/rules/keda.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/kubernetes.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/platform-skills.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/terraform.mdcCursor rule
- code-reviewSkill
- platform-skillsSkill
- ai-governanceSkill
- awesome-docsSkill
- aws-profileSkill
- awsSkill
- azureSkill
- backup-drSkill
- chaosSkill
- checkovSkill
- cluster-upgradeSkill
- commitSkill
- complianceSkill
- composite-actionsSkill
- datadogSkill
- debugSkill
- documentSkill
- doraSkill
- dynatraceSkill
- finopsSkill
- fluxcdSkill
- gateway-apiSkill
- github-actionsSkill
- gitopsSkill
- helmchartSkill
- karpenterSkill
- kedaSkill
- kingfisherSkill
- kubernetesSkill
- kubescape-operatorSkill
- kubescapeSkill
- kyvernoSkill
- linkerdSkill
- linuxSkill
- mcpSkill
- observabilitySkill
- opaSkill
- openshiftSkill
- platform-skillsSkill
- preflightSkill
- productSkill
- progressive-deliverySkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- renovateSkill
- runtime-securitySkill
- secretsSkill
- self-improveSkill
- setup-agentsSkill
- terraformSkill
- token-optimizerSkill
- triageSkill
- trivySkill
- zizmorSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

