TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Exploiting CI / CD Pipelines for fun and profit

124 pointsby mukesh6108 months ago

7 comments

theamk8 months ago
The real problem is keeping sensetive information in .git directory. Like WTH would you put your password, in plaintext, in some general ini file? (or into a source file for that matter)?<p>When I see things like those, they look so wrong to me. But sadly it&#x27;s apparently uncommon nowadays: not only random bloggers, even my coworkers see nothing wrong with putting passwords or tokens into general config or source code files. &quot;it&#x27;s just for a quick test&quot;1 they say and then they forget about it and the password is getting checked in, or shown at screenshare meeting.<p>Maybe that&#x27;s why there are so many security problems in industry? &#x2F;rant<p>(For those curious: for git specifically, use ssh with key auth. If for some reason you don&#x27;t want this, you can set up git&#x27;s credential helper to use your OS key store; or use plaintext git-crendetials, or even just good-old .netrc. For source code, something like &quot;PASSWORD = open(&quot;&#x2F;home&#x2F;user&#x2F;.config&#x2F;mypass.txt&quot;).read().strip()&quot; is barely longer than hardcoding it, but 100% eliminates chance of accidental secret checkin or upload)
评论 #41486826 未加载
评论 #41484527 未加载
评论 #41488871 未加载
评论 #41488932 未加载
评论 #41485980 未加载
评论 #41487954 未加载
评论 #41495481 未加载
TiddoLangerak8 months ago
Am I missing something, or does the step in<p>&gt; Pushing Malicious Changes to the Pipeline<p>mean that they already have full access to the repository in the first place? Normally I wouldn&#x27;t expect an attacker to be able to push to master (or any branch for that matter). Without that, the exploit won&#x27;t work. And with that access, there&#x27;s so many other exploits one can do that it&#x27;s really no longer about ci&#x2F;cd vulns.
评论 #41489176 未加载
评论 #41487668 未加载
评论 #41488985 未加载
评论 #41486961 未加载
ransom15388 months ago
100% of the script kiddies moved to .env and .git. My logs are filled with request for GET &#x2F;.env 404. All the kiddies focus mainly on those two, I think the return is the best for their effort. The .env file is super trendy now and used across languages now.
评论 #41489118 未加载
sebazzz8 months ago
I don’t understand why some authentication mechanisms, like Github Tokens don’t use a refresh token mechanism. So the token can be handed in once to create a refresh token, and then with that expiring access token can be requested. Now we (as users) have to bother with constantly expiring long-term tokens, not nothing in which of the hunderds of places we’ve might have put them.
ghxst8 months ago
Does this actually occur with real or high-value targets? I&#x27;m genuinely curious, as I can only envision this happening with smaller side projects. However, I&#x27;d be interested to hear any stories of encountering this in the wild. It&#x27;s a good reminder to stay mindful of what might accidentally be exposed.
mlhpdx8 months ago
I’ve never deployed a .git folder and wonder what systems&#x2F;approaches lead to such a thing. How does that happen?
评论 #41484242 未加载
评论 #41484277 未加载
评论 #41485591 未加载
评论 #41487999 未加载
评论 #41484725 未加载
ram_rattle8 months ago
naive question: Doesn&#x27;t github secret scan kind of thing wont catch this?
评论 #41487711 未加载
评论 #41486235 未加载