Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹
🐹 Go
Not in CISA KEV
HIGH severity

GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h worker

HIGHFix: go-vela/worker@e157274

GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h is a high-severity (CVSS 7.7) Information Exposure vulnerability in github.com/go-vela/worker. A fix is available for github.com/go-vela/worker — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Insecure Variable Substitution in Vela

Also known asCVE-2024-28236GO-2024-2641
Published
Mar 14, 2024
Updated
Sep 10, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 21, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.7%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs52th percentile — riskier than 52% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

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-pwx5-6wxg-px5h 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 377,636 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

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

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/workerall versions0.23.2go get github.com/go-vela/worker@v0.23.2

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/worker, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/go-vela/worker to 0.23.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h 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 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h. 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-pwx5-6wxg-px5h in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-pwx5-6wxg-px5h: worker (High 7.7) | O3 Security