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…
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-
Read at NIST National Vulnerability Database (CVE API 2.0)
- Vendor
- Gitea
- Product
- Gitea
- Weakness
- CWE-863
- Exposure class
- Developer platform
- NVD status
- Deferred
Why it ranks 20 (Routine)
- Product class: developer platform
- Recency: items published within 24 hours gain 15, within 72 hours 6, within 7 days 2.