GHSA-6F2P-296R-CC28
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-20 18:36 – Updated: 2026-08-20 18:36Impact
When Pipelines-as-Code is configured with a GitHub App installed across multiple repositories, the installation token issued during webhook processing is not scoped to the triggering repository by default. The token retains access to all repositories in the GitHub App installation.
This allows a user with push access to any repository in the installation to craft a PipelineRun with a remote task annotation pointing at a private repository in the same installation:
pipelinesascode.tekton.dev/task: "https://github.com/org/private-repo/blob/main/.tekton/secret-task.yaml"
Pipelines-as-Code resolves and inlines the remote task using the unscoped token, exposing the contents of the private repository's Tekton definitions. This is a read-only confidentiality breach, no write access is exposed.
Patches
The fix extracts the repository ID from the webhook payload during initial parsing so that it is available for later use. It then adds a fallback in the client setup path so that when no explicit scoping configuration is present and ScopeTokenToListOfRepos returns empty, the token is re-issued scoped to the triggering repository's ID rather than retaining access to the entire installation. The initial token remains unscoped so that the extra-repos lookup can still discover and resolve additional repositories when configured.
The fix is available in v0.48.0. Supported backport releases will be added here after release tags are published.
Workarounds
Limit the GitHub App installation to only the repositories that require Pipelines-as-Code. Avoid org-wide installations or mixed-trust installations where repositories with different access requirements share the same GitHub App. This restricts the blast radius of the unscoped token to only the repositories that are explicitly selected during App installation.
Credits
Reported and fixed by the Pipelines-as-Code maintainers.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.37.8"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.38.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.39.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.40.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.42.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/openshift-pipelines/pipelines-as-code"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.43.0"
},
{
"fixed": "0.48.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-54168"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-269",
"CWE-862"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-08-20T18:36:40Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Impact\nWhen Pipelines-as-Code is configured with a GitHub App installed across multiple repositories, the installation token issued during webhook processing is not scoped to the triggering repository by default. The token retains access to all repositories in the GitHub App installation.\n\nThis allows a user with push access to any repository in the installation to craft a PipelineRun with a remote task annotation pointing at a private repository in the same installation:\n```\npipelinesascode.tekton.dev/task: \"https://github.com/org/private-repo/blob/main/.tekton/secret-task.yaml\"\n```\nPipelines-as-Code resolves and inlines the remote task using the unscoped token, exposing the contents of the private repository\u0027s Tekton definitions. This is a read-only confidentiality breach, no write access is exposed.\n\n### Patches\nThe fix extracts the repository ID from the webhook payload during initial parsing so that it is available for later use. It then adds a fallback in the client setup path so that when no explicit scoping configuration is present and `ScopeTokenToListOfRepos` returns empty, the token is re-issued scoped to the triggering repository\u0027s ID rather than retaining access to the entire installation. The initial token remains unscoped so that the extra-repos lookup can still discover and resolve additional repositories when configured.\n\nThe fix is available in v0.48.0. Supported backport releases will be added here after release tags are published.\n\n### Workarounds\nLimit the GitHub App installation to only the repositories that require Pipelines-as-Code. Avoid org-wide installations or mixed-trust installations where repositories with different access requirements share the same GitHub App. This restricts the blast radius of the unscoped token to only the repositories that are explicitly selected during App installation.\n\n### Credits\nReported and fixed by the Pipelines-as-Code maintainers.",
"id": "GHSA-6f2p-296r-cc28",
"modified": "2026-08-20T18:36:41Z",
"published": "2026-08-20T18:36:40Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/tektoncd/pipelines-as-code/security/advisories/GHSA-6f2p-296r-cc28"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/tektoncd/pipelines-as-code"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Tekton Pipelines-as-Code: Unscoped GitHub App installation token allows unauthorized access to private repositories via remote task resolution"
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.