How severe is GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm has a CVSS score of 4.4/10, rated MEDIUM. Review your exposure and patch according to your risk tolerance.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm affects the following packages: ops (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

Update ops to 2.15.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm in my PyPI dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for ops. 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.

How do I mitigate GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

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 does O3 Security protect against GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Is GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.2%, placing it in the 10th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm?

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm is classified as CWE-532 (CWE-532). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm was published on July 22, 2024 and was last updated on July 22, 2024. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐍 PyPI

GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm

MEDIUM

ops leaking secrets if `subprocess.CalledProcessError` happens with a `secret-*` CLI command

Also known asCVE-2024-41129

Published

Jul 22, 2024

Updated

Jul 22, 2024

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk10th percentile+0.15%

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

1 pkg affected

🐍ops

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

Description

Summary

The issue here is that we pass the secret content as one of the args via CLI. This issue may affect any of our charms that are using: Juju (>=3.0), Juju secrets and not correctly capturing and processing subprocess.CalledProcessError.

There are two points that may log this command, in different files:

First, if there is an error during a secret handling, there will be a subprocess.CalledProcessError, which will contain the CLI comand + all its args. This is going to be logged in any logging level. This exception, if not caught by the charm, will bubble up to the /var/log/juju/ logs and syslog journal. Now, on Ubuntu 22.04, these logs are protected with:

$ juju ssh -m controller 0 -- ls -la /var/log/juju/
total 224
drwxr-xr-x 2 syslog adm      4096 Jul 14 10:59 .
drwxrwxr-x 9 root   syslog   4096 Jul 14 10:58 ..
-rw-r----- 1 syslog adm     20124 Jul 14 11:10 audit.log
-rw-r----- 1 syslog adm    110432 Jul 14 11:10 logsink.log
-rw-r----- 1 syslog adm     80783 Jul 14 11:06 machine-0.log
-rw-r----- 1 syslog adm       766 Jul 14 11:10 machine-lock.log
-rw-r--r-- 1 root   root        0 Jul 14 10:59 slow-query.log
-rw-r----- 1 syslog adm      3732 Jul 14 11:10 unit-controller-0.log

Second, certain audit setups may log terminal commands, which would result in this command being logged with its secrets. It is unknown if this is done on ubuntu security benchmarks, such as CIS hardening.

Keep in mind these logs may be copied or even backed up. Which exposes it to more services in the user's environment (e.g. CI runs in GH - although these are dummy password generated per test only).

Passing secrets straight via CLI is not advised. Here are some ways out:

Redacting: which commands and which args represent secrets are known, so they can be redacted. It would also mean capturing a subprocess.CalledProcessError, redacting its content and reissuing the same type of exception; this will not cover the case auditd is set to log CLI commands, if that is a risk
Temp files: secret-add, for example, can use a secret file instead, as can be seen here. However, if ops uses a file, ops will need to be sure to correctly remove it later
stdin: not sure it is accepted by secret-* commands, but generally, secrets are not shown on CLI whilst typing them; auditd may not capture that stdin

Severity Rationale

This is a CWE-532. Potentially, these secrets can lead to privilege escalation but Ubuntu default is to have logs only accessible to adm group users.

Marking this issue as "Moderate", as this report is not presenting a clear way on how to get access to the logs themselves: either getting local access to an adm group user (e.g. ubuntu) or recovering logs stored on a 3rd party service.

Details

2024-07-12T14:27:58.0175389Z unit-opensearch-3: 14:27:53 ERROR unit.opensearch/3.juju-log certificates:11: Uncaught exception while in charm code:
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0175524Z Traceback (most recent call last):
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0175957Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/model.py", line 3180, in _run
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0176165Z     result = subprocess.run(args, **kwargs)  # type: ignore
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0176381Z   File "/usr/lib/python3.10/subprocess.py", line 526, in run
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0176561Z     raise CalledProcessError(retcode, process.args,
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0177749Z subprocess.CalledProcessError: Command '('/var/lib/juju/tools/unit-opensearch-3/secret-add', '--label', 'opensearch:app:app-admin', '--owner', 'application', 'keystore-password-ca=aUE...')' returned non-zero exit status 1.
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0177765Z
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0178023Z The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0178038Z
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0178168Z Traceback (most recent call last):
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0178588Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/./src/charm.py", line 213, in <module>
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0178724Z     main(OpenSearchOperatorCharm)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0179129Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/main.py", line 548, in main
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0179237Z     manager.run()
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0179640Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/main.py", line 527, in run
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0179745Z     self._emit()
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0180150Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/main.py", line 516, in _emit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0180359Z     _emit_charm_event(self.charm, self.dispatcher.event_name)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0180840Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/main.py", line 147, in _emit_charm_event
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0180974Z     event_to_emit.emit(*args, **kwargs)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0181537Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 348, in emit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0181656Z     framework._emit(event)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0182091Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 860, in _emit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0182211Z     self._reemit(event_path)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0182659Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 950, in _reemit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0182770Z     custom_handler(event)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0183492Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/tls_certificates_interface/v3/tls_certificates.py", line 1811, in _on_relation_changed
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0183743Z     self.on.certificate_available.emit(
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0184173Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 348, in emit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0184291Z     framework._emit(event)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0184717Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 860, in _emit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0184887Z     self._reemit(event_path)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0186171Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/framework.py", line 950, in _reemit
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0186306Z     custom_handler(event)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0187043Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_tls.py", line 209, in _on_certificate_available
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0187320Z     self.store_new_ca(self.charm.secrets.get_object(scope, cert_type.val))
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0187942Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_tls.py", line 444, in store_new_ca
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0188242Z     self._create_keystore_pwd_if_not_exists(Scope.APP, CertType.APP_ADMIN, "ca")
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0188981Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_tls.py", line 432, in _create_keystore_pwd_if_not_exists
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0189119Z     self.charm.secrets.put_object(
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0189738Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_secrets.py", line 359, in put_object
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0189944Z     self._add_or_update_juju_secret(scope, key, value, merge)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0190652Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_secrets.py", line 272, in _add_or_update_juju_secret
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0190815Z     return self._add_juju_secret(scope, key, value)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0191462Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/lib/charms/opensearch/v0/opensearch_secrets.py", line 228, in _add_juju_secret
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0191660Z     secret = scope_obj.add_secret(safe_value, label=label)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0192110Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/model.py", line 477, in add_secret
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0192241Z     id = self._backend.secret_add(
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0192686Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/model.py", line 3624, in secret_add
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0192948Z     result = self._run('secret-add', *args, return_output=True)
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0193356Z   File "/var/lib/juju/agents/unit-opensearch-3/charm/venv/ops/model.py", line 3182, in _run
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0193489Z     raise ModelError(e.stderr) from e
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0193685Z ops.model.ModelError: ERROR this unit is not the leader
2024-07-12T14:27:58.0193692Z

From CI: https://github.com/canonical/opensearch-operator/actions/runs/9908987369/job/27376377521?pr=364

PoC

Deploy anything with juju
Run a dummy secret-add call that will fail
See the uncaught subprocess error

Impact

Juju secrets are generally composed of private keys, passwords, etc; generally valuable credentials that, if leaked, will likely allow an attacker to get privileged access to its target or other targets in the environment.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`ops`	≥ 2.0.0&&< 2.15.0	2.15.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for ops. 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 ops to 2.15.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm 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-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm 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-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary The issue here is that we pass the secret content as one of the args via CLI. This issue may affect any of our charms that are using: Juju (>=3.0), Juju secrets and not correctly capturing and processing `subprocess.CalledProcessError`. There are two points that may log this command, in different files: First, if there is an error during a secret handling, there will be a `subprocess.CalledProcessError`, which will contain the CLI comand + all its args. This is going to be logged in any logging level. This exception, if not caught by the charm, will bubble up to the `/var/log/ju

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-hcmv-jmqh-fjgm across PyPI dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works