Add dd-octo-sts trust policy for images-rb cross-repo dispatch

[TonyCTHsu]

Summary

• Adds the missing dd-octo-sts trust policy for images-rb's cross-repo dispatch, fixing a 404 during token exchange.
• Companion: Fix dd-octo-sts policy name for dd-trace-rb consumer images-rb#111

Change log entry

None.

[dd-octo-sts]

Thank you for updating Change log entry section 👏

^{Visited at: 2026-08-05 13:30:22 UTC}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f9b163d215

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[datadog-prod-us1-3]

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 90.04% (+0.00%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 669ee94 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-08-05 14:22:55

Comparing candidate commit 38a9046 in PR branch fix/update-images-sts-policy with baseline commit e425098 in branch master.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 48 metrics, 1 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:tracing - trace.to_digest - Continue

• unstable throughput [-1412.737op/s; +1629.616op/s] or [-4.830%; +5.572%]