Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹 Go

GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj

MEDIUM

Pebble service manager's file pull API allows access by any user

Also known asBIT-pebble-2024-3250CVE-2024-3250GO-2024-2692
Published
Apr 5, 2024
Updated
Mar 13, 2026
Affected
4 pkgs
Patched
4 / 4
Exploits
None indexed

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk10th percentile+0.14%
0.00%0.23%0.47%0.70%0.1%0.2%Dec 25Apr 26Jun 26

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Blast Radius

4 pkgs affected
🐹github.com/canonical/pebble🐹github.com/canonical/pebble🐹github.com/canonical/pebble🐹github.com/canonical/pebble

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Impact

Note: "Pebble" here refers to Canonical's service manager, not the Let's Encrypt ACME test server.

The API behind pebble pull, used to read files from the workload container by Juju charms, allows access from any user, instead of just admin. In Juju Kubernetes sidecar charms, Pebble and the charm run as root, so they have full access. But if another restricted unix user gains local access to the container host, they could hit the Pebble GET /v1/files?action=read API and would be allowed to read any file in the workload container, for example an ssh key or database password or other sensitive information. If there are ssh keys they could then potentially ssh into the workload, or if something like a database password they could log into the database.

Note that this requires local user access to the host machine. It seems unlikely that an attacker could gain this level of access in a Juju Kubernetes context, but if someone did and there's sensitive information in files accessible to Pebble, the consequences are bad.

To reproduce the issue, go back to the Pebble version in Juju 2.9 (5842ea68c9c7), do pebble run as root in one terminal window, then in another terminal window, as a regular user, use the pebble pull CLI. You will be able to pull any file as a regular user.

Patches

The original patch is commit https://github.com/canonical/pebble/commit/cd326225b9b0be067da7d8858e2c912078cbbbd5. There's also https://github.com/canonical/pebble/pull/406, which fixes this issue in more recent Pebble versions (that PR also fixes a separate issue we introduced more recently, but hasn't been released in Juju yet).

We released the fix in the following Pebble versions:

Juju will be releasing patch versions with this fix shortly:

  • Juju 2.9.49 (Pebble v1.1.1)
  • Juju 3.1.8 (Pebble v1.4.2)
  • Juju 3.3.4 (Pebble v1.4.2)
  • Juju 3.4.2 (Pebble v1.7.4)
  • Juju 3.5.0 (Pebble v1.10.2)

References

Affected Packages

4 total 4 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/canonical/pebble1.2.0&&< 1.4.21.4.2
🐹Gogithub.com/canonical/pebble1.5.0&&< 1.7.31.7.3
🐹Gogithub.com/canonical/pebble1.8.0&&< 1.10.21.10.2
🐹Gogithub.com/canonical/pebbleall versions1.1.1

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/canonical/pebble. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/canonical/pebble to 1.4.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact Note: "Pebble" here refers to [Canonical's service manager](https://github.com/canonical/pebble), not the [Let's Encrypt ACME test server](https://github.com/letsencrypt/pebble). The API behind `pebble pull`, used to read files from the workload container by Juju charms, allows access from any user, instead of just admin. In Juju Kubernetes sidecar charms, Pebble and the charm run as root, so they have full access. But if another restricted unix user gains local access to the container host, they could hit the Pebble `GET /v1/files?action=read` API and would be allowed to read any
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-4685-2x5r-65pj across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.