Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[PROPOSAL] [CCI] Update developer's guide regarding Windows script execution policy #455

Closed
Wielmany opened this issue Mar 24, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #456
Closed

Comments

@Wielmany
Copy link
Contributor

What are you proposing?

Currently the Developer's Guide solution to Windows not letting you running scripts on client PCs is to set the policy to Unrestricted. Running the yarn install script should be possible even with the execution policy set to RemoteSigned, and this will also prevent users from opening themselves up to potential malicious unsigned scripts that they can run.
Alternatively, we could add the line about reverting the security policy back to restricted after installing yarn package.

@wbeckler
Copy link

wbeckler commented Mar 25, 2023

Have you tested it? And is it possible to modify the windows integration test to run in RemoteSigned mode?

@Wielmany
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wielmany commented Mar 25, 2023

I did test that yarn runs in RemoteSigned mode, yes
Execution_policy
The tests already run with RemoteSigned execution policy:
image
In contrast - if the execution police is undefined (in this case it's the same as Restricted) it's blocked
image

@Wielmany Wielmany changed the title [PROPOSAL] [CCI] Update developer's guide regarding Window's execution policy [PROPOSAL] [CCI] Update developer's guide regarding Windows script execution policy Mar 25, 2023
@ilikmeister
Copy link
Contributor

Although, unrestricted will anyways warn the user when a script has been downloaded from the internet. So, in my book, there aren't any issues with it.

@Wielmany
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wielmany commented Mar 25, 2023

My concern was, how many people will read the warning instead of just clicking through (and since everything works fine with remoteSigned i think switching to it instead wouldn't hurt). Current PR also scopes the changes to the local user, so you don't need to have admin rights to run the policy change/script

@ilikmeister
Copy link
Contributor

Oh, that makes sense

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants