CVE-2021-32638 : Détail

CVE-2021-32638

4.4
/
Moyen
A01-Broken Access Control
0.08%V3
Local
2021-05-25
15h10 +00:00
2021-05-25
15h10 +00:00
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

CodeQL runner: Command-line options that make GitHub access tokens visible to other processes are now deprecated

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.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-200 Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
CWE-214 Invocation of Process Using Visible Sensitive Information
A process is invoked with sensitive command-line arguments, environment variables, or other elements that can be seen by other processes on the operating system.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 4.4 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

High

The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component allowing access to component-wide settings and files.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

V2 2.1 AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N [email protected]

EPSS

EPSS est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

Score EPSS

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

Percentile EPSS

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Github>>Codeql_action >> Version To (excluding) 20210304

Références