GitHubApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2018-1000184
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedA server-side request forgery vulnerability exists in Jenkins GitHub Plugin 1.29.0 and older in GitHubPluginConfig.java that allows attackers with Overall/Read access to cause Jenkins to send a GET request to a specified URL.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Jenkins GitHub Plugin versions 1.29.0 and older in GitHubPluginConfig.java allows authenticated attackers with Overall/Read access to cause Jenkins to send arbitrary GET requests to attacker-specified URLs.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
GitHubApplication
<= 1.29.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify GitHub plugin is installedNavigate to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and search for 'GitHub', or check the file $JENKINS_HOME/plugins/github.jpi (or .jpi.lastModified) to confirm the plugin files existAffected if The GitHub plugin is not installed on the Jenkins instance
-
Identify the installed GitHub plugin versionIn the Jenkins UI, go to Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab and locate the GitHub plugin to read the version number, or run: jenkins-cli.jar or check $JENKINS_HOME/plugins/github.jpi/META-INF/MANIFEST.MF for the Plugin-Version attributeAffected if The displayed version is 1.29.0 or any earlier version (1.29.0, 1.28.x, 1.27.x, etc.)
-
Confirm the GitHub plugin configuration existsNavigate to Manage Jenkins > Configure System > GitHub > GitHub Servers, or check for the presence of $JENKINS_HOME/org.jenkinsci.plugins.github.config.GitHubPluginConfig.xml configuration fileAffected if A GitHub configuration is saved in Jenkins (indicates the plugin has been configured and could be exploited)
-
Verify authentication is enabledCheck the GitHub plugin configuration at Manage Jenkins > Configure System > GitHub > GitHub Servers to see if API credentials are configured, or inspect the GitHubPluginConfig.xml file for stored credentialsAffected if Credentials are configured and the plugin is actively communicating with GitHub APIs
Your Jenkins instance is affected if the GitHub plugin is installed with version 1.29.0 or earlier and has been configured with GitHub credentials, allowing any authenticated user with Overall/Read permission to trigger the SSRF flaw.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade Jenkins GitHub Plugin to version 1.29.1 or later to remediate this SSRF vulnerability.
Fix this in GitHub
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,376.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-1000184 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-1000184 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data