GHSA-fv42-mx39-6fpw CVE-2022-45379
Whole-script approval in Jenkins Script Security Plugin vulnerable to SHA-1 collisions
- Severity
- 8.0 / 10
- High · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.51%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 43.47% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Fix
1190.v65867a_a_47126- Upgrade org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security to this version or later
Description
Script Security Plugin 1189.vb_a_b_7c8fd5fde and earlier stores whole-script approvals as the SHA-1 hash of the approved script. SHA-1 no longer meets the security standards for producing a cryptographically secure message digest.
Script Security Plugin 1190.v65867a_a_47126 uses SHA-512 for new whole-script approvals. Previously approved scripts will have their SHA-1 based whole-script approval replaced with a corresponding SHA-512 whole-script approval when the script is next used.
Whole-script approval only stores the SHA-1 or SHA-512 hash, so it is not possible to migrate all previously approved scripts automatically on startup.
Administrators concerned about SHA-1 collision attacks on the whole-script approval feature are able to revoke all previous (SHA-1) script approvals on the In-Process Script Approval page.
Affected versions
Maven
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security | < 1190.v65867a_a_47126 |
1190.v65867a_a_47126 |
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.plugins:script-security Maven → 1190.v65867a_a_47126
- maven
<dependency><groupId>org.jenkins-ci.plugins</groupId><artifactId>script-security</artifactId><version>1190.v65867a_a_47126</version></dependency>- gradle
implementation("org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security:1190.v65867a_a_47126")
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 8.0
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Weakness
CWE-326: Inadequate Encryption Strength
The product stores or transmits sensitive data using an encryption scheme that is theoretically sound, but is not strong enough for the level of protection required.
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use an encryption scheme that is currently considered to be strong by experts in the field.
CWE-328: Use of Weak Hash
The product uses an algorithm that produces a digest (output value) that does not meet security expectations for a hash function that allows an adversary to reasonably determine the original input (preimage attack), find another input that can produce the same hash (2nd preimage attack), or find multiple inputs that evaluate to the same hash (birthday attack).
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design: Use an adaptive hash function that can be configured to change the amount of computational effort needed to compute the hash, such as the number of iterations ("stretching") or the amount of memory required. Some hash functions perform salting automatically. These functions can significantly increase the overhead for a brute force attack compared to intentionally-fast functions such as MD5. For example, rainbow table attacks can become infeasible due to the high computing overhead. Finally, since computing power gets faster and cheaper over time, the technique can be reconfigured to increase the workload without forcing an entire replacement of the algorithm in use. Some hash functions that have one or more of these desired properties include bcrypt [REF-291], scrypt [REF-292], and PBKDF2 [REF-293]. While there is active debate about which of these is the most effective, they are all stronger than using salts with hash functions with very little computing overhead. Note that using these functions can have an impact on performance, so they require special consideration to avoid denial-of-service attacks. However, their configurability provides finer control over how much CPU and memory is used, so it could be adjusted to suit the environment's needs.
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-1003029 Sandbox bypass in Script Security Plugin | Critical Known exploited | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-cfj9-2vgr-hpxp Jenkins Script Security Plugin has a script security bypass vulnerability | High | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-c3jm-9vj7-5v66 Jenkins Script Security Plugin sandbox bypass vulnerability | High | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-p334-gfhq-c7w6 Jenkins Script Security Plugin: Missing permission checks allow enumeration of pending and approved classpaths | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-jv82-75fh-23r7 Missing permission check in Jenkins Script Security Plugin | Medium | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-2g4q-9vm9-9fw4 Jenkins Script Security Plugin sandbox bypass vulnerability | High | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-v63g-v339-2673 Jenkins Script Security Plugin has sandbox bypass vulnerability involving crafted constructor bodies | Critical | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
| GHSA-76qj-9gwh-pvv3 Sandbox bypass in Jenkins Script Security Plugin | High | Also affects org.jenkins-ci.plugins:script-security |
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