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

GHSA-69p4-j5v5-x234

HIGH

Server/API for Vela Insecure Variable Substitution

Also known asGO-2024-2648
Published
Mar 15, 2024
Updated
Jun 4, 2024
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed

Blast Radius

1 pkg affected
🐹github.com/go-vela/server

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

Vela pipelines can use variable substitution combined with insensitive fields like parameters, image and entrypoint to inject secrets into a plugin/image and — by using common substitution string manipulation — can bypass log masking and expose secrets without the use of the commands block. This unexpected behavior primarily impacts secrets restricted by the "no commands" option. This can lead to unintended use of the secret value, and increased risk of exposing the secret during image execution bypassing log masking.

Given by the following substitution examples: using parameters

steps:
  - name: example
    image: <some plugin>
    secrets: [ example_secret ]
    parameters:
      example: $${EXAMPLE_SECRET}

using image tag

steps:
  - name: example
    image: <some plugin>:latest${EXAMPLE_SECRET}
    secrets: [ example_secret ]

using entrypoint as a shim for commands

steps:
  - name: example
    image: <some plugin>
    secrets: [ example_secret ]
    entrypoint:
      [
        "sh",
        "-c",
        "echo $EXAMPLE_SECRET",
      ]

To exploit this the pipeline author must be supplying the secrets to a plugin that is designed in such a way that will print those parameters in logs. Plugin parameters are not designed for sensitive values and are often intentionally printed throughout execution for informational/debugging purposes. Parameters should therefore be treated as insensitive.

While Vela provides secrets masking, secrets exposure is not entirely solved by the masking process. A docker image (plugin) can easily expose secrets if they are not handled properly, or altered in some way. There is a responsibility on the end-user to understand how values injected into a plugin are used. This is a risk that exists for many CICD systems (like GitHub Actions) that handle sensitive runtime variables. Rather, the greater risk is that users who restrict a secret to the "no commands" option and use image restriction can still have their secret value exposed via substitution tinkering, which turns the image and command restrictions into a false sense of security.

Patches

N/A

Workarounds

  • Do not provide sensitive values to plugins that can potentially expose them, especially in parameters that are not intended to be used for sensitive values.
  • Ensure plugins (especially those that utilize shared secrets) follow best practices to avoid logging parameters that are expected to be sensitive.
  • Minimize secrets with pull_request events enabled, as this allows users to change pipeline configurations and pull in secrets to steps not typically part of the CI process.
  • Make use of the build approval setting, restricting builds from untrusted users
  • Limit use of shared secrets, as they are less restrictive to access by nature.

References

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

Affected products: go-vela/worker

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/go-vela/serverall versions0.23.2

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/go-vela/server. 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/go-vela/server to 0.23.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-69p4-j5v5-x234 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-69p4-j5v5-x234 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-69p4-j5v5-x234. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Impact Vela pipelines can use variable substitution combined with insensitive fields like `parameters`, `image` and `entrypoint` to inject secrets into a plugin/image and — by using common substitution string manipulation — can bypass log masking and expose secrets without the use of the commands block. This unexpected behavior primarily impacts secrets restricted by the "no commands" option. This can lead to unintended use of the secret value, and increased risk of exposing the secret during image execution bypassing log masking. Given by the following substitution examples: using `param
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-69p4-j5v5-x234 in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-69p4-j5v5-x234 across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.