GitHub Community
Pull image from container registry using fine-grained access token #38467
|
Hello, is it possible to pull image from ghcr.io using fine-grained personal access token? I've tried to use the token with read permissions but image pull fails with 403 Forbidden status. |
Replies: 44 comments 35 replies
|
Hi there @mkniazuk123 and welcome to our community! Thank you for asking a great question 🙂 To get started, introduce yourself in our official introduction thread |
|
Was just looking into this myself. From the docs, fine-grained tokens are not supported. |
|
Thank you @arbuckle |
|
I am also having this issue, seems like over the past few days PAT (classic) is now broken for NPM registry also. |
|
Is this on the road map? It's one of our main use cases for tokens and I'd love to use a finer grained token approach for this. |
|
Same here. We're looking to enforce fine-grained tokens so we can take advantage of the Enterprise management of the tokens. This will be a blocker to enforcing the removal of classic tokens. |
|
Fine-grained access token is also not working for me for accessing the Docker registry gchr.io :( This would be great once it works though |
|
Any update on this? |
|
Does GitHub have any plans on fixing this? I think that access token with access only to packages in specific repository is one of the most basic security features they could offer. For example GitLab allows access token generation for individual repo and I think that is much cleaner solution for deployment tokens. |
|
Any update on this @github? It seems crazy that in order to publish container images to the Github registry you must use a classic token that has full write access to the repo. |
|
Any updates on this? 🙏 |
|
So looking into this a bit more: I can understand why the devs didn't initially add package support, because packages themselves are tied to an account, or an organization, and not to a specific repository. In our cases, if a package is linked to a repo (And permissions are inherited), it should be fairly trivial to check permission from a fine-grained access token if they have access to read packages that are linked to that repository. I implore github to add functionality for fine-grained access tokens, as security is important: I don't want to give PAT tokens to my cluster which have more access than what is needed. |
|
Okay, so "repository contents" in fine-grained tokens wasn't it, and I'm never getting back the time I wasted... |
|
Hi guys, I was able to pull successfully from Github Registry using Fine-Grained token Repository permissions
Can you please try again on your end and let me know how it works? Thanks, |
|
Sadly I get However the |
|
What pull requests (PRs) have to do with pulling packages? I suspect you had somehow authenticated successfully to the registry before as this does NOT WORK AT ALL. |
|
@dummy-andra Can it work for pushing? I tried to set read-write to all permissions, but actions can't push image to github registry. Got 403. |
|
I used classical token to push to github registry. I had a project in a repo that used classical token with full permissions and the pipeline from here dit the push. Other projects in diferite repos that only needed to pull from github registry, were able to do this using fine-grained tokens using the permissions listed in the picture above. However I even if it worked to pull I faced issues next on the line because "To use the REST API to manage GitHub Packages, you must authenticate using a personal access token (classic)." So...looks that for now we are stuck using the classic |
|
Thank you to everyone that has shared how to grant "package read permission" using the fine-grained access token. With that in mind, I was reminded how the "classic" provides the precise access rights - ironic. Until there is what I would call "direct support" for providing read access to the organization's packages using the fine-grained access token, I might recommend sticking with |
|
Atleast add permission to: write:packages This is what we need |
|
For folks who have been following along, GItHub has added this into their public roadmap: github/roadmap#558 |
|
It was added and removed several times, the latest being removed in 2024. It hasn't been readded since. |
|
@ankneis Do you have any insight into the process behind removing it from the roadmap? This is 2026 btw :) |
|
@github - Whenever you want guys ! Nobody is waiting for you 🤣 🤯 🔫 |
|
god i hate github |
|
Still missing the feature |
|
not me wondering why tf the access token wasn't working 🤦♂️ |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
|
they removed it from the public roadmap in 2024, doesn't seem they are willing to implement it 🫠 |
|
for anyone still searching for a solution, this is the only thing that reliably works: we have worked around the issue by creating a dummy github account that only has read access to this one repository and are using a token created from that user account it's ugly but the best option we have until there is communication from github on this, which I don't think there will ever be |
|
what ive been using as a work around recently is just using the actions pipeline to push image from container to ghcr using the internal token from github its not a Personal token but the internal one ... i apologize if this has been answered already - you could in theory like you did just create a new token thats tethered to just packages but still a personalAT |
|
@architectfromthefuture Pushing to the repo has never really been the issue, as it's standard as part of the build process to deploy using CI_TOKEN. It's consuming the image via kubernetes or other process that a PAT token has a big security impact. |
|
using actions pipeline is a diff authentication path hence not a PAT |
|
@architectfromthefuture that's works for pushing to a registry, but like dan said that's not really the issue here. the problem here is controlling access for external services that need to pull the image securely. i think @pujux answer is the only way I've found to do it, or else just publish to a completely different container registry outside of github that has modern security controls |
|
The enshitification of github continues |
Docker login to GHCR with a Personal Access Token (classic)Posting this method as found no method to use fine-grained access token. Pulling from a private GitHub Container Registry package requires authentication using Setup
echo "ghp_YOUR_TOKEN" | docker login ghcr.io -u x-access-token --password-stdin
docker pull ghcr.io/YOUR_ORG/YOUR_IMAGE:latestUsing |
|
Is this AI slop? This whole discussion is about not using PAT's, but being able to access packages via fine-grained access tokens. |
|
No method for fine-grained access tokens as per other forum comments. Only method I found was to use |
|
The documentation already clearly explains how to connect to the docker registry with PAT here |
This issue is about how to avoid using classic tokens for registry access since they have security limitations compared to fine-grained tokens, such as not being able to manage and approve them at the organization level. Using classic tokens like this becomes a blocker for organizations needing to disable classic tokens completely. |
|
Hi, there. Can you guide me how to do it in the right way? |
|
Our security team has disabled PAT (classic) in our organization and we lost access to all private images. Need fine-grained tokens with container registry ASAP! |
|
That sounds like the exact security deadlock that Github needs to clarify. Your security team disabling classic tokens is a reasonable hardening move If the only practical path for private image pulls is still classic PAT, then organizations are forced to choose between:
That is such a bad tradeoff... This is not just a convenience issue. Private image pulls are part of literally everything as well as production recovery paths... Github docs need to clearly state whether fine-grained PATs can authenticate to ghcr.io for private image pull/push, what permissions are required, and what the recommended migration path is for organizations that have disabled classic PAT... If the only working GHCR path requires classic PATs,then GitHub is effectively pressuring orgs to loosen a control they intentionally put in place............... |
|
I strongly suggest to use dockerhub or an alternative for private images repository, github doesn't seems to want to fix this issue for years and now they have bigger fishes to catch. |
IMO, ideally, GitHub Apps should also be a first-class, fully supported mechanism for container registry workflows, so organizations can eliminate PAT-based access entirely. Right now, the lack of clarity and parity between token types creates a security regression: teams are pushed toward weaker, legacy authentication simply to keep essential CI/CD and production systems running. That tradeoff is not acceptable in a modern security model. And @singatias, your short message has pushed me over the edge, and I will be pushing for a switch away from GitHub entirely. |
|
Having an issue with this now, having just started for a new employer, and now I'm left with the challenge of accessing all things needed for work without having to expose my personal projects. Can't believe that this is still an issue in today's world where we need to be so much more security conscious with the increasing threat levels!? |
|
iam through aws |
|
alright time for Forgejo |
and others
Was just looking into this myself. From the docs, fine-grained tokens are not supported.
https://docs.github.com/en/packages/working-with-a-github-packages-registry/working-with-the-container-registry