Gitea Actions fork workflow trust through pull request review commit
Default status is the baseline for the product, each version can override it (e.g. patched versions marked unaffected).
| Vendor | Product | Default status | Versions | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gitea | Gitea | unaffected |
|
No data.
No data.
| Vendor | Product | Versions | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gitea | Gitea |
|
No CVSS v4.0
No CVSS v3.0
No CVSS v2
This CVE is not in the KEV list.
Exploit prediction score: < 1% (0.238% probability within 30 days)
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Metrics |
ssvc
|
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Metrics |
cvssV3_1
|
cvssV3_1
|
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-829 | |
| References |
| |
| Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| First Time appeared |
Gitea
Gitea gitea |
|
| Vendors & Products |
Gitea
Gitea gitea |
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | Workflows triggered by a pull request review were read from the commit named in the review's `commit_id`, while the fork restrictions were decided by the reviewed pull request, and the commit was not checked to belong to that pull request. A user with read access to a repository could place a commit of their own in it, through a fork pull request or an AGit push, and submit a review naming that commit on a pull request whose head branch is in the same repository. On instances with a runner serving the repository, the attacker's workflow then ran without approval, received the Actions secrets of the repository and its owner, and got a `GITEA_TOKEN` with write access to the repository. Review-triggered workflows now run on the pull request head. | |
| Title | Gitea Actions fork workflow trust through pull request review commit | |
| Weaknesses | CWE-863 | |
| References |
|