You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
featureAlt: "Magnifying glass inspecting a checklist with a cracked bug, CI/CD symbol, and padlock on a blue-purple gradient background."
10
+
draft: false
11
11
---
12
12
13
13
When a _GitHub Actions workflow_ that had been working fine for months suddenly failed, I went down a familiar rabbit hole of false assumptions, vague errors, and misleading logs. This post details the troubleshooting journey, the kind that initially screams ***“runner environment change,”*** but ends in a quiet whisper: ***“your token expired.”***
14
14
15
-
## Context: Automation That Moved 🐛 Issues
16
-
For context, I had a GitHub Actions workflow using `gh` (GitHub CLI) to automatically move issues labeled `bug` into a "Bugs" column on my GitHub Project board (#6). This workflow ran fine for months—until mid-April 2025, when it silently failed.
The automated _GitHub Actions workflow_ intelligently ***managed bug-related issues*** by moving them to a dedicated "Bugs" column in the [project management board](https://github.com/users/socrabytes/projects/6/views/3).
19
18
20
-
-**Workflow Name:**`🐛 Auto Bug Column Management`
21
-
-**Purpose:** Move issues labeled `bug` to a "Bugs" column in GitHub Projects (Project #6)
Like many others, I use `ubuntu-latest` for my GitHub Actions runners for convenience. Around the time my workflow failed (mid-to-late April 2025), I noticed warnings appearing in my Actions logs about `ubuntu-latest` preparing to point to the new `ubuntu-24.04` LTS, updating from `ubuntu-22.04`.
30
+
Like many others, I use `ubuntu-latest` for my GitHub Actions runners for convenience. The timing was suspicious. Around the failure window, `ubuntu-latest` was shifting to `ubuntu-24.04`, and warnings started appearing in my logs. That seemed like the obvious issue—new OS, new CLI versions, maybe breaking changes.
30
31
31
-
{{< screenshot src="ubuntu-latest-warning.png" alt="GitHub Actions warning about ubuntu-latest" >}}
32
+
![GitHub Actions warning about ubuntu-latest](runner-warning.png"GitHub Actions warning about ubuntu-latest")
32
33
33
-
This seemed like the obvious culprit. Runner environment changes are a common source of workflow failures. I also checked the runner image software lists (like those tracked in actions/runner-images issues, e.g., #10636) and noted potential differences in pre-installed software, including the gh CLI version itself (my local gh 2.68.1 vs. runner versions potentially being 2.69.0 or 2.70.0).
34
+
This seemed like the obvious culprit. Runner environment changes are a common source of workflow failures. I also checked the runner image software lists (like those tracked in actions/runner-images issues, e.g., [#10636](https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/10636)) and noted potential differences in pre-installed software, including the `gh CLI` version itself (my local `gh 2.68.1` v.s. runner version `2.70.0`).
34
35
35
-
My first logical step was to eliminate this variable. I updated my workflow YAML:
36
+
My first logical step was to eliminate this variable by pinning the runner to `ubuntu-22.04`.
I reran the workflow, confident this would likely resolve the issue.
46
+
The result? No change. The failure persisted.
46
47
47
-
## Hitting a Wall: The Cryptic Error
48
-
49
-
Pinning the runner to `ubuntu-22.04` didn't fix it. The workflow failed again, specifically at the step designed to find the project item ID associated with the labeled issue:
The error message wasn't immediately helpful regarding the runner environment: unknown owner type. Why would it suddenly not know the owner type for "socrabytes"? This didn't feel like a gh version compatibility issue on the surface.
53
+
The error? `unknown owner type` with exit code 1.
73
54
74
-
## Isolating the Variable: Local 🆚 Remote Testing
55
+
### Eliminating Environment Variables
75
56
76
-
If it wasn't the runner OS or (maybe) the `gh` version difference, I needed to confirm the command itself was still valid.
57
+
This wasn’t an obvious environment problem, and it didn’t *look* like a CLI version incompatibility. I checked anyway:
77
58
78
-
1. **Test Locally (Current Version):** I ran the equivalent `gh project item-list` command on my local machine, which had `gh version 2.68.1` installed via Homebrew. **Result: It worked perfectly.**
79
-
2. **Test Locally (Upgraded Version):** To further rule out a breaking change in newer `gh` versions, I upgraded my local CLI (`brew upgrade gh`) to `gh version 2.71.1`. I ran the command again locally. **Result: It *still* worked perfectly.**
59
+
- Local `gh 2.68.1`: ✅ Worked
60
+
- Upgraded local `gh 2.71.1`: ✅ Still worked
61
+
- Actions runner: ❌ Failed
80
62
81
-
This was a critical finding. If the command worked locally with both the older version *and* a version newer than the one on the runner, the `gh` version number itself was highly unlikely to be the direct cause. The problem had to be specific to the GitHub Actions execution **context**.
63
+
Environment inconsistencies were ruled out. Something about the Actions environment was off.
82
64
83
-
## Digging Deeper: Checking Authentication in Actions
65
+
## Refocusing: Authentication in CI/CD
84
66
85
-
My workflow uses a Personal Access Token (PAT) stored as a secret (`secrets.PROJECT_TOKEN`) to authenticate `gh` commands, allowing it to modify my project board. Although I knew the PAT *should* be valid (it hadn't been changed recently), the next logical step was to explicitly verify authentication *within the runner environment*.
67
+
My workflow uses a **Personal Access Token (PAT)** stored as a secret (`secrets.PROJECT_TOKEN`) to authenticate `gh` commands, allowing it to modify my project board. Although I knew the PAT *should* be valid (it hadn't been changed recently), the next logical step was to explicitly ***verify authentication within the runner environment***.
86
68
87
69
I added a simple debug command to the failing step: `gh auth status`.
echo "gh cli version: $(gh --version)" # Added for good measure
94
-
echo "Debugging OWNER: $OWNER"
95
-
echo "Checking auth status:" # <-- Added this line
96
-
gh auth status # <-- Added this line
75
+
echo "gh cli version: $(gh --version)"
76
+
echo "Checking auth status:"
77
+
gh auth status
97
78
98
79
# Original command follows...
99
80
ITEM_ID=$(
100
-
gh project item-list "$PROJECT_NUMBER" # ... etc
81
+
gh project item-list "$PROJECT_NUMBER" ...
101
82
)
102
-
# ...
83
+
...
103
84
env:
104
85
GH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.PROJECT_TOKEN }}
105
86
```
106
-
## The "Aha!" Moment: The Real Culprit
107
-
108
-
The output from this debug step in the Actions log was crystal clear:
109
-
```CLI
110
-
gh cli version: gh version 2.70.0 (2025-04-15)
111
-
https://github.com/cli/cli/releases/tag/v2.70.0
112
-
Debugging OWNER: socrabytes
113
-
Checking auth status:
114
-
github.com
115
-
X Failed to log in to github.com using token (GH_TOKEN)
116
-
- Active account: true
117
-
- The token in GH_TOKEN is invalid.
118
-
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.
119
-
```
120
87
121
-
There it was: **"The token in GH\_TOKEN is invalid."** The `unknown owner type` error was simply a downstream effect of `gh` failing to authenticate properly *before* it could even process the project and owner details.
88
+
### The Real Culprit 🧨
89
+
90
+
{{< lead >}}
91
+
The token in GH\_TOKEN is invalid.
92
+
{{< /lead >}}
122
93
123
-
**The Resolution: A Simple Token Refresh**
94
+
124
95
125
-
Why was the token invalid? I checked my repository secrets – the `PROJECT_TOKEN` secret itself showed "Last updated 4 months ago".
96
+
The `unknown owner type` error was simply a downstream effect of `gh` failing to authenticate properly *before* it could even process the project and owner details.
126
97
127
-
**(Optional: Insert Image `image_597009.png` here, showing the secrets list)**
98
+
### Root Cause: An Expired PAT 🔐
99
+
The PAT used in `PROJECT_TOKEN` had simply expired. GitHub’s UI still showed “last updated 4 months ago,” which was misleading-- <mark>this reflects when the secret was added, not the PAT’s expiration.</mark>
128
100
129
-
However, the "last updated" time for the *secret storage* doesn't reflect the *PAT's expiration date*. PATs are generated with specific lifetimes (e.g., 30, 60, 90 days, or custom). It was almost certain my PAT, likely created with a 90-day expiry, had simply expired.
PATs are generated with specific lifetimes (e.g., 30, 60, 90 days, or custom). It was almost certain my PAT, likely created with a 90-day expiry, had simply expired.
104
+
105
+
## The Resolution: A Simple Token Refresh
130
106
131
107
The fix was straightforward:
132
108
@@ -137,31 +113,26 @@ The fix was straightforward:
137
113
5. Go back to the `youtube-digest` repository Settings -> Secrets and variables -> Actions.
138
114
6. Update the `PROJECT_TOKEN` secret with the new token value.
139
115
140
-
After updating the secret, I re-ran the workflow, and it executed perfectly.
116
+
After updating the secret, I re-ran the workflow, and it functioned as designed.
141
117
142
-
**Lessons Learned & Takeaways**
118
+
## 🧭 Lessons Learned
143
119
144
120
This half-day troubleshooting journey reinforced several key points:
145
121
122
+
146
123
- **Debug Systematically:** Don't get locked onto the first hypothesis, even if initial evidence seems strong (like runner update warnings). Methodically eliminate variables.
147
-
- **Leverage Local Testing:** Comparing behavior locally versus in CI/CD is crucial for pinpointing environment-specific issues.
124
+
- **Test Locally + Remotely**: Validate CLI commands across both local and CI environments to isolate failure context.
148
125
- **Verify Authentication Early:** When CI/CD tools interact with APIs, especially if encountering strange errors, explicitly check the authentication status (`gh auth status` in this case) early in the debugging process.
149
126
- **Error Messages Can Mislead:** The initial `unknown owner type` error sent me down the wrong path initially. The real error was hidden until authentication was explicitly checked.
150
-
- **Manage Credential Lifecycles:** PATs expire! This incident highlighted the need for proactive management. Setting calendar reminders or documenting expiration dates is crucial, even for solo projects.
127
+
- **Manage Credential Lifecycles:** <mark>PATs expire!</mark> This incident highlighted the need for proactive management. Setting calendar reminders or documenting expiration dates is crucial, even for solo projects.
151
128
152
-
**Conclusion**
129
+
## Final Thoughts 💭
153
130
154
-
While the root cause – an expired PAT – was operationally simple, the path to diagnosing it involved navigating misleading clues and systematically ruling out other potential causes. It was a valuable reminder that sometimes the most obvious environmental changes aren't the culprit, and checking foundational aspects like authentication is key. Hopefully, sharing this journey helps someone else who encounters a similarly confusing workflow failure!
131
+
This wasn’t a code issue. It wasn’t a config mistake. It was an invisible clock on an auth token—masked by a misleading error. Sharing this isn’t just about fixing a one-off 🐛 bug. It’s about how to think like a debugger in CI/CD land, where context is everything and logs don’t always tell the truth.
155
132
156
-
---
157
-
158
-
159
-
## 🐛 **The Problem**
160
-
161
-
{{< lead >}}
162
-
When a _GitHub Actions workflow_ that had been working fine for months suddenly failed
0 commit comments