GHSA-7g95-jmg9-h524 BIT-jenkins-2025-27624 CVE-2025-27624
Jenkins cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability
- Severity
- 5.4 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.44%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 38.32% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-352 Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
- Fix
2.500- Upgrade org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core to this version or later
Description
Jenkins 2.499 and earlier, LTS 2.492.1 and earlier does not require POST requests for the HTTP endpoint toggling collapsed/expanded status of sidepanel widgets (e.g., Build Queue and Build Executor Status widgets), resulting in a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability.
This vulnerability allows attackers to have users toggle their collapsed/expanded status of sidepanel widgets.
Additionally, as the API accepts any string as the identifier of the panel ID to be toggled, attacker-controlled content can be stored in the victim’s user profile in Jenkins.
Jenkins 2.500, LTS 2.492.2 requires POST requests for the affected HTTP endpoint.
Affected versions
Maven
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core | >= 2.493, < 2.500 |
2.500 |
| org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core | < 2.492.2 |
2.492.2 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core Maven → 2.500
- maven
<dependency><groupId>org.jenkins-ci.main</groupId><artifactId>jenkins-core</artifactId><version>2.500</version></dependency>- gradle
implementation("org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core:2.500")
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 5.4
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
Weakness
CWE-352: Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)
The web application does not, or cannot, sufficiently verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user who sent the request, which could have originated from an unauthorized actor.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330] Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]
- Implementation: Ensure that the application is free of cross-site scripting issues (CWE-79), because most CSRF defenses can be bypassed using attacker-controlled script.
- Architecture and Design: Generate a unique nonce for each form, place the nonce into the form, and verify the nonce upon receipt of the form. Be sure that the nonce is not predictable (CWE-330). [REF-332]
- Architecture and Design: Identify especially dangerous operations. When the user performs a dangerous operation, send a separate confirmation request to ensure that the user intended to perform that operation.
- Architecture and Design: Use the "double-submitted cookie" method as described by Felten and Zeller: When a user visits a site, the site should generate a pseudorandom value and set it as a cookie on the user's machine. The site should require every form submission to include this value as a form value and also as a cookie value. When a POST request is sent to the site, the request should only be considered valid if the form value and the cookie value are the same. Because of the same-origin policy, an attacker cannot read or modify the value stored in the cookie. To successfully submit a form on behalf of the user, the attacker would have to correctly guess the pseudorandom value. If the pseudorandom value is cryptographically strong, this will be prohibitively difficult. This technique requires Javascript, so it may not work for browsers that have Javascript disabled. [REF-331]
- Architecture and Design: Do not use the GET method for any request that triggers a state change.
- Implementation: Check the HTTP Referer header to see if the request originated from an expected page. This could break legitimate functionality, because users or proxies may have disabled sending the Referer for privacy reasons.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-6f9g-cxwr-q5jr Arbitrary file read vulnerability through the Jenkins CLI can lead to RCE | Critical Known exploited | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-8pqx-3rxx-f5pm Jenkins discloses project names via fingerprints | High Known exploited | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-26wc-3wqp-g3rp Deserialization of Untrusted Data in Jenkins | Critical Known exploited | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| CVE-2018-1000861 Deserialization of Untrusted Data in Jenkins | Critical Known exploited | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-m6wv-wh8g-64xc Jenkins does not encrypt secrets from POST config.xml submissions before storing them in job configurations | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-93qh-vwrm-c5pw Jenkins: Stored XSS vulnerability in node offline cause description | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-92m7-4fpw-2wxm Jenkins: Open Redirect phishing attacks possible via "from" parameter in "Delegate to servlet container" | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
| GHSA-g28p-6mcc-v4rv Jenkins exposes other users' timezone and view names to users with Overall/Read permission | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.main:jenkins-core |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor