Dependabot Actions troubleshooting suggestions might be insecure

[Marcono1234]

Code of Conduct

• I have read and agree to the GitHub Docs project's Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

docs/data/reusables/dependabot/dependabot-on-actions-troubleshooting-workflows.md

Lines 7 to 8 in e2f952a

	1. You can update your workflows so that they are no longer triggered by {% data variables.product.prodname_dependabot %} using an expression like: `if: github.actor != 'dependabot[bot]'`. For more information, see [AUTOTITLE](/actions/learn-github-actions/expressions).
	1. You can modify your workflows to use a two-step process that includes `pull_request_target` which does not have these limitations. For more information, see [AUTOTITLE](/code-security/dependabot/troubleshooting-dependabot/troubleshooting-dependabot-on-github-actions#restrictions-when-dependabot-triggers-events).

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

• It currently recommends a if: github.actor != 'dependabot[bot]' check
  Maybe (at least for pull requests) it would be safer to use github.event.pull_request.user.login != 'dependabot[bot]'. Otherwise malicious users could abuse this to skip certain workflows, see related https://www.synacktiv.com/publications/github-actions-exploitation-dependabot.
• It currently suggests using pull_request_target and a "two-step process" without going into detail.
  It might be safer to not recommend pull_request_target (due to its inherent security risks), but rather suggest increasing the permissions and using Dependabot secrets (which is bullet point 3 of that recommendations list, so maybe this point 2 can simply be omitted?).

Additional information

I am not completely sure about the proposed changes, so please let me know if I forget to consider something, or if something I wrote is incorrect.

[Sharra-writes]

Thanks so much for opening another issue! I'll get this triaged for review, too.

[github-actions]

Thanks for opening an issue! We've triaged this issue for technical review by a subject matter expert 👀

[rohitkuril]

Full access

[github-actions]

This is a gentle bump for the docs team that this issue is waiting for technical review.