Vulnerabilities > CVE-2021-32638 - Information Exposure vulnerability in Github Codeql Action

047910
CVSS 2.1 - LOW
Attack vector
LOCAL
Attack complexity
LOW
Privileges required
NONE
Confidentiality impact
PARTIAL
Integrity impact
NONE
Availability impact
NONE
local
low complexity
github
CWE-200
NVD
Published: 2021-05-25
Updated: 2022-07-02

Summary

Github's CodeQL action is provided to run CodeQL-based code scanning on non-GitHub CI/CD systems and requires a GitHub access token to connect to a GitHub repository. The runner and its documentation previously suggested passing the GitHub token as a command-line parameter to the process instead of reading it from a file, standard input, or an environment variable. This approach made the token visible to other processes on the same machine, for example in the output of the `ps` command. If the CI system publicly exposes the output of `ps`, for example by logging the output, then the GitHub access token can be exposed beyond the scope intended. Users of the CodeQL runner on 3rd-party systems, who are passing a GitHub token via the `--github-auth` flag, are affected. This applies to both GitHub.com and GitHub Enterprise users. Users of the CodeQL Action on GitHub Actions are not affected. The `--github-auth` flag is now considered insecure and deprecated. The undocumented `--external-repository-token` flag has been removed. To securely provide a GitHub access token to the CodeQL runner, users should **do one of the following instead**: Use the `--github-auth-stdin` flag and pass the token on the command line via standard input OR set the `GITHUB_TOKEN` environment variable to contain the token, then call the command without passing in the token. The old flag remains present for backwards compatibility with existing workflows. If the user tries to specify an access token using the `--github-auth` flag, there is a deprecation warning printed to the terminal that directs the user to one of the above options. All CodeQL runner releases codeql-bundle-20210304 onwards contain the patches. We recommend updating to a recent version of the CodeQL runner, storing a token in your CI system's secret storage mechanism, and passing the token to the CodeQL runner using `--github-auth-stdin` or the `GITHUB_TOKEN` environment variable. If still using the old flag, ensure that process output, such as from `ps`, is not persisted in CI logs.

Vulnerable Configurations

Part Description Count
Application
Github
11

Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)

Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)

  • Subverting Environment Variable Values
    The attacker directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The attacker's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the attacker.
  • Footprinting
    An attacker engages in probing and exploration activity to identify constituents and properties of the target. Footprinting is a general term to describe a variety of information gathering techniques, often used by attackers in preparation for some attack. It consists of using tools to learn as much as possible about the composition, configuration, and security mechanisms of the targeted application, system or network. Information that might be collected during a footprinting effort could include open ports, applications and their versions, network topology, and similar information. While footprinting is not intended to be damaging (although certain activities, such as network scans, can sometimes cause disruptions to vulnerable applications inadvertently) it may often pave the way for more damaging attacks.
  • Exploiting Trust in Client (aka Make the Client Invisible)
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by placing themselves in the communication channel between client and server such that communication directly to the server is possible where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
  • Browser Fingerprinting
    An attacker carefully crafts small snippets of Java Script to efficiently detect the type of browser the potential victim is using. Many web-based attacks need prior knowledge of the web browser including the version of browser to ensure successful exploitation of a vulnerability. Having this knowledge allows an attacker to target the victim with attacks that specifically exploit known or zero day weaknesses in the type and version of the browser used by the victim. Automating this process via Java Script as a part of the same delivery system used to exploit the browser is considered more efficient as the attacker can supply a browser fingerprinting method and integrate it with exploit code, all contained in Java Script and in response to the same web page request by the browser.
  • Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
    This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.

References