Automated code review and security linting integration for CI/CD pipelines using reviewdog. Aggregates findings from multiple security and quality tools (SAST, linters, formatters) into unified code review comments on pull requests. Use when: (1) Integrating security scanning into code review workflows, (2) Automating security feedback on pull requests, (3) Consolidating multiple tool outputs into actionable review comments, (4) Enforcing secure coding standards in CI/CD pipelines, (5) Provid...
Scanned 2/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add AgentSecOps/SecOpsAgentKit --skill reviewdog --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Reviewdog?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/agentsecops-reviewdog)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: reviewdog
description: >
Automated code review and security linting integration for CI/CD pipelines using reviewdog.
Aggregates findings from multiple security and quality tools (SAST, linters, formatters) into
unified code review comments on pull requests. Use when: (1) Integrating security scanning
into code review workflows, (2) Automating security feedback on pull requests,
(3) Consolidating multiple tool outputs into actionable review comments, (4) Enforcing
secure coding standards in CI/CD pipelines, (5) Providing inline security annotations
during development.
version: 0.1.0
maintainer: asrour
category: secsdlc
tags: [code-review, ci-cd, automation, security-feedback, pull-request, linting, sast-integration]
frameworks: [OWASP, CWE]
dependencies:
tools: [reviewdog, git]
optional: [semgrep, bandit, hadolint, checkov, gitleaks, shellcheck, eslint]
references:
- https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog
- https://reviewdog.github.io/
---
# Reviewdog - Automated Security Code Review
## Overview
Reviewdog is an automated code review tool that integrates security scanning and linting results
into pull request review comments. It acts as a universal adapter between various security tools
(SAST scanners, linters, formatters) and code hosting platforms (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket),
enabling seamless security feedback during code review.
**Key Capabilities:**
- Aggregates findings from multiple security and quality tools
- Posts inline review comments on specific code lines
- Supports 40+ linters and security scanners out-of-the-box
- Integrates with GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, CircleCI, and other CI platforms
- Filters findings to show only new issues in diff (fail-on-diff mode)
- Supports custom rulesets and security policies
## Quick Start
### Basic reviewdog usage with a security scanner:
```bash
# Install reviewdog
go install github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog/cmd/reviewdog@latest
# Run a security scanner and pipe to reviewdog
bandit -r . -f json | reviewdog -f=bandit -reporter=github-pr-review
# Or use with Semgrep
semgrep --config=auto --json | reviewdog -f=semgrep -reporter=local
```
### GitHub Actions integration:
```yaml
- name: Run reviewdog
uses: reviewdog/action-setup@v1
- name: Security scan with reviewdog
env:
REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
run: |
bandit -r . -f json | reviewdog -f=bandit -reporter=github-pr-review
```
## Core Workflow
### Step 1: Install reviewdog
Install reviewdog in your CI environment or locally:
```bash
# Via Go
go install github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog/cmd/reviewdog@latest
# Via Homebrew (macOS/Linux)
brew install reviewdog
# Via Docker
docker pull reviewdog/reviewdog:latest
```
### Step 2: Configure Security Tools
Set up the security scanners you want to integrate. Reviewdog supports multiple input formats:
**Supported Security Tools:**
- **SAST**: Semgrep, Bandit, ESLint Security, Brakeman
- **Secret Detection**: Gitleaks, TruffleHog, detect-secrets
- **IaC Security**: Checkov, tfsec, terrascan
- **Container Security**: Hadolint, Trivy, Dockle
- **General Linters**: ShellCheck, yamllint, markdownlint
### Step 3: Integrate into CI/CD Pipeline
Add reviewdog to your CI pipeline to automatically post security findings as review comments:
**GitHub Actions Example:**
```yaml
name: Security Review
on: [pull_request]
jobs:
security-scan:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Setup reviewdog
uses: reviewdog/action-setup@v1
- name: Run Bandit SAST
env:
REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
run: |
pip install bandit
bandit -r . -f json | \
reviewdog -f=bandit \
-name="Bandit SAST" \
-reporter=github-pr-review \
-filter-mode=added \
-fail-on-error
```
**GitLab CI Example:**
```yaml
security_review:
stage: test
script:
- pip install bandit reviewdog
- bandit -r . -f json |
reviewdog -f=bandit
-reporter=gitlab-mr-discussion
-filter-mode=diff_context
only:
- merge_requests
```
### Step 4: Configure Review Behavior
Customize reviewdog's behavior using flags:
```bash
# Filter to show only issues in changed lines
reviewdog -filter-mode=diff_context
# Filter to show only issues in added lines
reviewdog -filter-mode=added
# Fail the build if findings are present
reviewdog -fail-on-error
# Set severity threshold
reviewdog -level=warning
```
### Step 5: Review Security Findings
Reviewdog posts findings as inline comments on the pull request:
- **Inline annotations**: Security issues appear directly on affected code lines
- **Severity indicators**: Critical, High, Medium, Low severity levels
- **Remediation guidance**: Links to CWE/OWASP references when available
- **Diff-aware filtering**: Only shows new issues introduced in the PR
## Security Considerations
- **API Token Security**: Store GitHub/GitLab tokens in secrets management (GitHub Secrets, GitLab CI/CD variables)
- Never commit tokens to version control
- Use minimum required permissions (read/write on pull requests)
- Rotate tokens regularly
- **Access Control**:
- Configure reviewdog to run only on trusted branches
- Use CODEOWNERS to require security team approval for reviewdog config changes
- Restrict who can modify `.reviewdog.yml` configuration
- **Audit Logging**:
- Log all security findings to SIEM or security monitoring platform
- Track when findings are introduced and resolved
- Monitor for bypassed security checks
- **Compliance**:
- Maintains audit trail of security reviews (SOC2, ISO27001)
- Enforces security policy compliance in code review
- Supports compliance reporting through CI/CD artifacts
- **Safe Defaults**:
- Use `fail-on-error` to block PRs with security findings
- Enable `filter-mode=added` to catch new vulnerabilities
- Configure severity thresholds appropriate to your risk tolerance
## Bundled Resources
### Scripts (`scripts/`)
- `setup_reviewdog.py` - Automated reviewdog installation and CI configuration generator
- `run_security_suite.sh` - Runs multiple security scanners through reviewdog
### References (`references/`)
- `supported_tools.md` - Complete list of supported security tools with configuration examples
- `reporter_formats.md` - Available output formats and reporter configurations
- `cwe_mapping.md` - Mapping of common tool findings to CWE categories
### Assets (`assets/`)
- `github_actions_template.yml` - GitHub Actions workflow for multi-tool security scanning
- `gitlab_ci_template.yml` - GitLab CI configuration for reviewdog integration
- `.reviewdog.yml` - Sample reviewdog configuration file
- `pre_commit_config.yaml` - Pre-commit hook integration
## Common Patterns
### Pattern 1: Multi-Tool Security Suite
Run multiple security tools and aggregate results in a single review:
```bash
#!/bin/bash
# Run comprehensive security scan
# Python security
bandit -r . -f json | reviewdog -f=bandit -name="Python SAST" -reporter=github-pr-review &
# Secrets detection
gitleaks detect --report-format json | reviewdog -f=gitleaks -name="Secret Scan" -reporter=github-pr-review &
# IaC security
checkov -d . -o json | reviewdog -f=checkov -name="IaC Security" -reporter=github-pr-review &
wait
```
### Pattern 2: Severity-Based Gating
Block PRs based on severity thresholds:
```yaml
- name: Critical findings - Block PR
run: |
semgrep --config=p/security-audit --severity=ERROR --json | \
reviewdog -f=semgrep -level=error -fail-on-error -reporter=github-pr-review
- name: Medium findings - Comment only
run: |
semgrep --config=p/security-audit --severity=WARNING --json | \
reviewdog -f=semgrep -level=warning -reporter=github-pr-review
```
### Pattern 3: Differential Security Scanning
Only flag new security issues introduced in the current PR:
```bash
# Only show findings in newly added code
reviewdog -filter-mode=added -fail-on-error
# Show findings in modified context (added + surrounding lines)
reviewdog -filter-mode=diff_context
```
### Pattern 4: Custom Security Rules
Integrate custom security policies using grep or custom parsers:
```bash
# Check for prohibited patterns
grep -nH -R "eval(" . --include="*.py" | \
reviewdog -f=grep -name="Dangerous Functions" -reporter=github-pr-review
# Custom JSON parser
./custom_security_scanner.py --json | \
reviewdog -f=rdjson -name="Custom Policy" -reporter=github-pr-review
```
## Integration Points
- **CI/CD Platforms**:
- GitHub Actions (native action available)
- GitLab CI/CD
- CircleCI
- Jenkins
- Azure Pipelines
- Bitbucket Pipelines
- **Security Tools**:
- **SAST**: Semgrep, Bandit, ESLint, Brakeman, CodeQL
- **Secrets**: Gitleaks, TruffleHog, detect-secrets
- **IaC**: Checkov, tfsec, terrascan, kics
- **Containers**: Hadolint, Trivy, Dockle
- **Code Hosting**:
- GitHub (PR comments, check runs, annotations)
- GitLab (MR discussions)
- Bitbucket (inline comments)
- Gerrit (review comments)
- **SDLC Integration**:
- **Pre-commit hooks**: Fast local feedback before push
- **PR/MR review**: Automated security review on code changes
- **Trunk protection**: Block merges with security findings
- **Security dashboard**: Aggregate findings for visibility
## Troubleshooting
### Issue: Reviewdog not posting comments
**Solution**:
- Verify GitHub token has correct permissions (`repo` scope for private repos, `public_repo` for public)
- Check CI environment has `REVIEWDOG_GITHUB_API_TOKEN` or `GITHUB_TOKEN` set
- Ensure repository settings allow PR comments from workflows
- Verify reviewdog is running in PR context (not on push to main)
### Issue: Too many false positives
**Solution**:
- Use `filter-mode=added` to only show new issues
- Configure tool-specific suppressions in `.reviewdog.yml`
- Adjust severity thresholds with `-level` flag
- Use baseline files to ignore existing issues
### Issue: Performance issues with large repositories
**Solution**:
- Run reviewdog only on changed files using `filter-mode=diff_context`
- Cache tool dependencies and databases in CI
- Run expensive scanners on scheduled jobs, lightweight ones on PR
- Use parallel execution for multiple tools
### Issue: Integration with custom security tools
**Solution**:
- Convert tool output to supported format (checkstyle, sarif, rdjson, rdjsonl)
- Use `-f=rdjson` for custom JSON output following reviewdog diagnostic format
- Create errorformat pattern for text-based outputs
- See `references/reporter_formats.md` for format specifications
## Advanced Configuration
### Custom reviewdog configuration (`.reviewdog.yml`)
```yaml
runner:
bandit:
cmd: bandit -r . -f json
format: bandit
name: Python Security
level: warning
semgrep:
cmd: semgrep --config=auto --json
format: semgrep
name: Multi-language SAST
level: error
gitleaks:
cmd: gitleaks detect --report-format json
format: gitleaks
name: Secret Detection
level: error
```
### Integration with Security Frameworks
Map findings to OWASP Top 10 and CWE:
```bash
# Semgrep with OWASP ruleset
semgrep --config "p/owasp-top-ten" --json | \
reviewdog -f=semgrep -name="OWASP Top 10" -reporter=github-pr-review
# Include CWE references in comments
reviewdog -f=semgrep -name="CWE Analysis" -reporter=github-pr-review
```
## References
- [Reviewdog Documentation](https://github.com/reviewdog/reviewdog)
- [Supported Tools and Formats](https://reviewdog.github.io/supported-tools)
- [GitHub Actions Integration](https://github.com/reviewdog/action-setup)
- [OWASP Secure Coding Practices](https://owasp.org/www-project-secure-coding-practices-quick-reference-guide/)
- [CWE Top 25](https://cwe.mitre.org/top25/)
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!