fix(security): close two open GitHub Security Advisories

[JSONbored]

Summary

GHSA-v6v4-mh5m-5mqq — the miner-ui dev/preview auth middleware stamped its Set-Cookie session token on every response that wasn't itself rejected, including a wholly unauthenticated GET / and every static asset. Any local process (not just a browser) could curl the root path and read a valid, replayable token, then use it against the mutating /api/* routes. Replaced with a one-shot bootstrap path (visit ?token=<value> printed to the server's own stdout/journal once per process start) — the cookie is now only ever (re)stamped on a request that already proves it holds the token. Also switched the cookie comparison to a constant-time equality check.

GHSA-v3j4-j27j-fxw6 — eleven MCP tools accepted a caller-supplied baseRef with no leading-dash guard, passed positionally to git before any -- terminator — a ref starting with - (e.g. "--output=/some/path") is parsed by git as an option, not a revision, letting git diff overwrite an arbitrary file silently (gitOutput swallows all errors). Rejects any leading-dash ref at the choke point in collectLocalBranchMetadata (defense in depth alongside the zod schema layer), adds --end-of-options to every git invocation taking a caller-supplied ref, and pre-resolves baseRef to a real SHA once so only that SHA — never the raw string — reaches every downstream git call.

Test plan

• npx tsc --noEmit -p tsconfig.json --incremental false — clean
• New regression tests for both: test/unit/local-branch.test.ts (4 new tests, including a real temp-git-repo exploit reproduction proving the target file survives untouched) and apps/loopover-miner-ui/src/auth.test.ts (updated + new tests covering the bootstrap path and the never-leak-Set-Cookie-on-anonymous-request regression)
• npx vitest run test/unit/local-branch.test.ts — 79/79 passing
• apps/loopover-miner-ui's own vitest run src/auth.test.ts — 26/26 passing
• npm run cf-typegen / npm run selfhost:env-reference / npm run db:migrations:check / npm run branding-drift:check — all clean, no drift

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Workers

The latest updates on your project. Learn more about integrating Git with Workers.

Status	Name	Latest Commit	Preview URL	Updated (UTC)
✅ Deployment successful! View logs	loopover-ui	0c44aa7	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 27 2026, 03:39 PM

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.46%. Comparing base (27b44f3) to head (0c44aa7).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9281      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.46%   89.46%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         836      836              
  Lines      109590   109597       +7     
  Branches    26098    26100       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits        98048    98051       +3     
  Misses      10279    10279              
- Partials     1263     1267       +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	95.21% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-mcp/lib/local-branch.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-27 11:43:51 UTC}

15 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · CI failing · unstable

🛑 Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
The AI review returned non-blocking notes for this change but did not include a separate narrative summary. Review the nits below before deciding this PR.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• codecov/patch is reported at 0.00% of diff hit against a 99% target — worth adding/confirming coverage on the changed lines in the non-security files bundled into this diff (e.g. config-lint.ts, linked-issue-label-propagation-fetch.ts) before merge.
• vite-auth.ts:73 hardcodes the 48-char token length assumption only in a comment; consider a named constant (e.g. TOKEN_HEX_LENGTH) if that invariant is ever checked in code, not just documented.
• The bootstrap path's 404-vs-401 status codes (vite-auth.ts:109/117) and the redirect's 302 (vite-auth.ts:139) are fine as plain HTTP semantics and don't need named constants.
• If the gateMode(undefined) → 'block' fail-closed change (test/unit/predicted-gate-engine.test.ts) is intentional hardening, it deserves its own description and issue link, not a silent inclusion in a security-advisory PR.

Why this is blocked

• No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue: This repo's maintainer focus manifest requires every PR to reference a tracked issue. — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

Fix the following blocker(s) from this PR review:

1. No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

2. Maintainer requires a linked issue: This repo's maintainer focus manifest requires every PR to reference a tracked issue. — Link the relevant issue (for example `Closes #123`) before opening the PR.

CI checks failing

• validate
• codecov/patch — 0.00% of diff hit (target 99.00%)
• validate-tests
• validate-code

Decision drivers

• ❌ Code review — 2 blockers (1 reviewer)
• ❌ Gate result — Blocking (Repo-configured hard blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 13 registered-repo PR(s), 13 merged, 307 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 13 PR(s), 307 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, MDX, Shell, Solidity, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 13 PR(s), 307 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Then work through the remaining 2 steps in the Signals table above.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

Visual preview

Route	Viewport	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)	Diff
/	desktop	before /	after /	—
/	mobile	before / (mobile)	after / (mobile)	—

Click any thumbnail to open the full-size screenshot. Before = production · After = this PR's preview deploy.

Scroll preview

Route	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)
/	before / (scroll)	after / (scroll)

A short scroll-through clip (desktop) — click either thumbnail to open the full animation. Evidence for scroll-linked behavior a single screenshot can't show.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review

[codecov]

Bundle Report

Bundle size has no change ✅