Toward Understanding the Security of Plugins in Continuous Integration Services
Xiaofan Li, Yacong Gu, Chu Qiao, Zhenkai Zhang, Daiping Liu, Lingyun Ying, Haixin Duan, Xing Gao
Abstract
Mainstream Continuous Integration (CI) platforms have provided the plugin functionality to accelerate the development of CI pipelines. Unfortunately, CI plugins, which are essentially reusable code snippets, also expose new attack surfaces as plugins might be developed by less trusted users. In this paper, we present an in-depth study to understand potential security risks in existing CI plugins. We conduct a comprehensive analysis of plugin implementations on four mainstream CI platforms (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, CircleCI, and Azure Pipelines), and investigate several weak links in existing plugin distributions and isolation mechanisms. We investigate seven attack vectors that can enable attackers to hijack plugins and distribute malicious code without plugins users being aware, and further exploit hijacked plugins to manipulate the workflow execution. Additionally, we find that plugin dependency (a plugin references other plugins) might further amplify the attack impact of our disclosed attacks. To evaluate the potential impact, we conduct a large-scale measurement on GitHub and GitLab, covering a total of 1,328,912 repositories using the aforementioned CI platforms. Our measurement results show that a large number of repositories and existing plugins, including many widely used ones, are potentially vulnerable to the proposed attacks. We have duly reported the identified vulnerabilities and received positive responses. CCS CONCEPTS • Security and privacy;
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext a903e1fc-7031-42ea-bda1-e260f6bcc1f6Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on21
- Small World with High Risks: A Study of Security Threats in the npm EcosystemMarkus Zimmermann, Cristian-Alexandru Staicu, Cam Tenny, Michael PradelUSENIX Security 2019 · 281 citations
- Hiding in Plain Sight: A Longitudinal Study of Combosquatting AbusePanagiotis Kintis, Najmeh Miramirkhani, Charles Lever, Yizheng Chen et al.CCS 2017 · 166 citations
- How Bad Can It Git? Characterizing Secret Leakage in Public GitHub RepositoriesMichael Meli, Matthew R. McNiece, Bradley ReavesNDSS 2019 · 130 citations
- Freezing the Web: A Study of ReDoS Vulnerabilities in JavaScript-based Web ServersCristian-Alexandru Staicu, Michael PradelUSENIX Security 2018 · 125 citations
- SYNODE: Understanding and Automatically Preventing Injection Attacks on NODE.JSCristian-Alexandru Staicu, Michael Pradel, Benjamin LivshitsNDSS 2018 · 91 citations
Related papers
- Characterizing the Security of Github CI WorkflowsIgibek Koishybayev, Aleksandr Nahapetyan, Raima Zachariah, Siddharth Muralee et al.USENIX Security 2022
- Continuous Intrusion: Characterizing the Security of Continuous Integration ServicesYacong Gu, Lingyun Ying, Huajun Chai, Chu Qiao et al.S&P 2023
- More Haste, Less Speed: Cache Related Security Threats in Continuous Integration ServicesYacong Gu, Lingyun Ying, Huajun Chai, Yingyuan Pu et al.S&P 2024 · 4 citations
- Action Required: A Mixed-Methods Study of Security Practices in GitHub ActionsYusuke Kubo, Fumihiro Kanei, Mitsuaki Akiyama, Takuro Wakai et al.NDSS 2026 · 3 citations
- ARGUS: A Framework for Staged Static Taint Analysis of GitHub Workflows and ActionsSiddharth Muralee, Igibek Koishybayev, Aleksandr Nahapetyan, Greg Tystahl et al.USENIX Security 2023
