Letting people know promptly is also the right thing to do and probably mandated by (at least some) customer contracts. You can't tell just some people; it would leak anyway.

I prefer Forgejo, which is a Gitea fork. Forgejo is what runs Codeberg if I understand correctly.

It reminds me of the famous "mistakes were made" Nixon quote.

"We are investigating unauthorized access" sounds much better than "we've been hacked"

If that’s true and they do intend on shredding their copy on sale, what stops GitHub from buying it back themselves? (through a proxy, obv)

Before 2026 I hosted client code on GitHub, now it feels suboptimal, code is both an intellectual property asset and security risk. Especially if the company is software based, self-hosting your code just has a much better risk profile for almost no cost.

It's also one of those things that warms your team up and gets them ready for actual work, a team that has to self host their git and other infra, like self-hosting DNS servers with bind, will have a much better work ethic than engineers who click buttons on a SaaS and conflate their role as users of a system instead of admins of one.

Additionally, using github actions, and relying on Pull Requests (Tm) (R) (C) has always been (useful) vendor lock in (and a security risk in case of GH Actions). It wasn't enough to lock down a choice, but it tilts the balance in favour of less dependencies, which with the increase of CVEs and supply chain vulns, seems to be the name of the game for this new era. Build it in house, ignore the dogma.

You know how Windows used to get a majority of the malware due to market share?

Now the market share is all the AI agent users.

I think AI has helped to a degree. I think a lot of people have known about massive gaps in security, but it's been a sort of "why would I?" and a gap that didn't feel worth hopping for attackers.

The gap is smaller now.

I've been talking about package worms for... fuck, a decade. Insane. I've even thought about publishing one to prove a point but, well, it's illegal obviously. And ethically questionable.

Someone just vibecoded up what we've all known was possible for a long, long time. Just like a lot of other vibe coded projects.

I remember talking to a malware author a long time ago and I think this would have been exactly what he would have loved. He liked building custom C2 protocols, tiny malware, etc, but when we discussed a particular idea for owning massive amounts of infrastructure his response was basically "that's a lot of effort to get a krebs article and FBI attention". Now it's not so much effort!

I think it's more about the popularity than the capability. The chances you might accidentally put a Github access token into an undesired security context goes up dramatically when you actually create and use one on a regular basis. The developers at GH are certainly using these tools just like the rest of us.

[dead]

I heard an engineer at Anthropic was submitting 150 PRs per day. That's one PR every 5 to 10 minutes, so you can guess the level of review and quality control involved.

It's more likely that it isn't coincidental at all: software development-oriented LLMs became a lot better towards the end of 2025, and so there's a non-zero chance that people are using them to find new security exploits.

(People are not sleeping on this and it is not something people have failed to notice. I don't use LLMs at all and even I have noticed it - largely because there is approximately nobody that isn't talking about it.)

Microsoft owned so many a CYA to explain why the liability insurance goes up to investors?

This should be the defacto for all X links. For users who aren't signed in, X is such a hostile website you can't see anything.

I guess it's hostile to signed in users in a different way.

My understanding is that when it's something that requires user action they'd directly send comms to customers.

Are you a bot?

It’s a very popular messaging platform for tech enthusiasts.

Probably the best option after sending a mass email when customers need to take action. The status page is for reliability issues impacting end users & the blog is for in-depth analysis.

It's certainly not the right platform. It'd be one thing if they had any official communication on the matter anywhere else. Maybe they're ashamed and are trying to limit the visibility while only technically issuing an announcement.

They announced this exclusively on X.com, which ranks barely above Pinterest in terms of usage. That's below Reddit, Snapchat, WeChat, and Instagram, and requires a user account to view profiles and posts. And that's ignoring all the reasons X is a divisive platform with an extreme political bent.

GitHub chose not to announce this on any other social media either (BlueSky, Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, LinkedIn, or Mastodon, as of this posting, and with no emails sent on the matter.)

Disabling vscode/cursor extensions auto-updates also makes sense

The only way to 'harden your github actions' is to not use github actions.

Thanks for making me aware of zizmor, just ran and fixed all issues on our core repos.

You also need to make sure you take care using PR titles and descriptions in your GHA because if they contain `text` it *may be executed lmfao.

edited: not "will", may depending on your GHA