Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 2.33% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2021
CVE-2021-32724High confidence
check-spelling workflow vulnerable to GITHUB_TOKEN leakage via symlink attack
check-spelling · check-spelling
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-G86G-CHM8-7R2P ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
9.9CriticalCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Patch availableCritical technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityCritical→Operational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs check-spelling check-spelling and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Critical technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Patch available01
What, why and how
check-spelling is a github action which provides CI spell checking. In affected versions and for a repository with the [check-spelling action](https://github.com/marketplace/actions/check-spelling) enabled that triggers on `pull_request_target` (or `schedule`), an attacker can send a crafted Pull Request that causes a `GITHUB_TOKEN` to be exposed. With the `GITHUB_TOKEN`, it's possible to push commits to the repository bypassing standard approval processes. Commits to the repository could then steal any/all secrets available to the repository. As a workaround users may can either: [Disable the workflow](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/managing-workflow-runs/disabling-and-enabling-a-workflow) until you've fixed all branches or Set repository to [Allow specific actions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#allowing-specific-actions-to-run). check-spelling isn't a verified creator and it certainly won't be anytime soon. You could then explicitly add other actions that your repository uses. Set repository [Workflow permissions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#setting-the-permissions-of-the-github_token-for-your-repository) to `Read repository contents permission`. Workflows using `check-spelling/check-spelling@main` will get the fix automatically. Workflows using a pinned sha or tagged version will need to change the affected workflows for all repository branches to the latest version. Users can verify who and which Pull Requests have been running the action by looking up the spelling.yml action in the Actions tab of their repositories, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml - you can filter PRs by adding ?query=event%3Apull_request_target, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml?query=event%3Apull_request_target.
What
check-spelling is a github action which provides CI spell checking. In affected versions and for a repository with the [check-spelling action](https://github.com/marketplace/actions/check-spelling) enabled that triggers on `pull_request_target` (or `schedule`), an attacker can send a crafted Pull Request that causes a `GITHUB_TOKEN` to be exposed. With the `GITHUB_TOKEN`, it's possible to push commits to the repository bypassing standard approval processes. Commits to the repository could then steal any/all secrets available to the repository. As a workaround users may can either: [Disable the workflow](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/managing-workflow-runs/disabling-and-enabling-a-workflow) until you've fixed all branches or Set repository to [Allow specific actions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#allowing-specific-actions-to-run). check-spelling isn't a verified creator and it certainly won't be anytime soon. You could then explicitly add other actions that your repository uses. Set repository [Workflow permissions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#setting-the-permissions-of-the-github_token-for-your-repository) to `Read repository contents permission`. Workflows using `check-spelling/check-spelling@main` will get the fix automatically. Workflows using a pinned sha or tagged version will need to change the affected workflows for all repository branches to the latest version. Users can verify who and which Pull Requests have been running the action by looking up the spelling.yml action in the Actions tab of their repositories, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml - you can filter PRs by adding ?query=event%3Apull_request_target, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml?query=event%3Apull_request_target.
Why
The product writes sensitive information to a log file.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
check-spelling is a github action which provides CI spell checking. In affected versions and for a repository with the [check-spelling action](https://github.com/marketplace/actions/check-spelling) enabled that triggers on `pull_request_target` (or `schedule`), an attacker can send a crafted Pull Request that causes a `GITHUB_TOKEN` to be exposed. With the `GITHUB_TOKEN`, it's possible to push commits to the repository bypassing standard approval processes. Commits to the repository could then steal any/all secrets available to the repository. As a workaround users may can either: [Disable the workflow](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/managing-workflow-runs/disabling-and-enabling-a-workflow) until you've fixed all branches or Set repository to [Allow specific actions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#allowing-specific-actions-to-run). check-spelling isn't a verified creator and it certainly won't be anytime soon. You could then explicitly add other actions that your repository uses. Set repository [Workflow permissions](https://docs.github.com/en/github/administering-a-repository/managing-repository-settings/disabling-or-limiting-github-actions-for-a-repository#setting-the-permissions-of-the-github_token-for-your-repository) to `Read repository contents permission`. Workflows using `check-spelling/check-spelling@main` will get the fix automatically. Workflows using a pinned sha or tagged version will need to change the affected workflows for all repository branches to the latest version. Users can verify who and which Pull Requests have been running the action by looking up the spelling.yml action in the Actions tab of their repositories, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml - you can filter PRs by adding ?query=event%3Apull_request_target, e.g., https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/actions/workflows/spelling.yml?query=event%3Apull_request_target.
Why
The product writes sensitive information to a log file.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Changed: exploitation can affect a different security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-532 ↗
CWE-532: Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File. The product writes sensitive information to a log file.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SChangedScope: The attack can affect a component governed by a different security authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- check-spelling: < 0.0.19
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- A mitigation or workaround reference is available from the source linked below; validate it against the affected product and version.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 9 Sept 2021 · Last source change 3 Aug 2024, 23:33 UTC · CWE-532 · Insertion of Sensitive Information into Log File
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2022-6338
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.