GHSA-4c87-9xq5-5c35 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.4) Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability in com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline. A fix is available for com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Content-Security-Policy protection for user content disabled by Jenkins ZAP Pipeline Plugin
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-4c87-9xq5-5c35 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 377,238 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
com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipelineReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Maven packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Jenkins sets the Content-Security-Policy header to static files served by Jenkins (specifically DirectoryBrowserSupport), such as workspaces, /userContent, or archived artifacts.
ZAP Pipeline Plugin prior to 1.10 globally disables the Content-Security-Policy header for static files served by Jenkins. This allows cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks by users with the ability to control files in workspaces, archived artifacts, etc.
Jenkins instances with Resource Root URL configured are largely unaffected. A possible exception are file parameter downloads. The behavior of those depends on the specific version of Jenkins:
- Jenkins 2.231 and newer, including 2.235.x LTS, is unaffected, as all resource files from user content are generally served safely from a different domain, without restrictions from
Content-Security-Policyheader. - Jenkins between 2.228 (inclusive) and 2.230 (inclusive), as well as all releases of Jenkins 2.222.x LTS and the 2.204.6 LTS release, are affected by this vulnerability, as file parameters are not served via the Resource Root URL.
- Jenkins 2.227 and older, 2.204.5 and older, don’t have XSS protection for file parameter values, see SECURITY-1793.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| ☕Maven | com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline | all versions | 1.10com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline:1.10 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update com.vrondakis.zap:zap-pipeline to 1.10 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-4c87-9xq5-5c35 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 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-4c87-9xq5-5c35 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-4c87-9xq5-5c35. 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-4c87-9xq5-5c35 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-4c87-9xq5-5c35 across Maven dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.