RunnerApplication · GitLab
CVE-2020-13295
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 · uneditedFor GitLab Runner before 13.0.12, 13.1.6, 13.2.3, by replacing dockerd with a malicious server, the Shared Runner is susceptible to SSRF.
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 confidenceGitLab Runner versions before 13.0.12, 13.1.6, and 13.2.3 contain an SSRF vulnerability where an attacker who can replace the dockerd daemon with a malicious server can cause the Shared Runner to make unintended network requests to attacker-controlled endpoints.
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
RunnerApplication
>= 1.0, < 13.0.12>= 13.1, < 13.1.6>= 13.2, < 13.2.3CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Determine installed GitLab Runner versionRun `gitlab-runner --version` or check the RPM/DEB package version with `rpm -q gitlab-runner` or `dpkg -l gitlab-runner`Affected if The reported version falls within < 13.0.12, 13.1.x before 13.1.6, or 13.2.x before 13.2.3
-
Identify if Docker executor is configuredCheck GitLab Runner configuration file (typically /etc/gitlab-runner/config.toml) for executor = "docker" in any [[runners]] sectionAffected if Docker executor is in use, as this vulnerability targets Docker-based shared runners
-
Verify dockerd binary integrityCompare the SHA256 hash of /usr/bin/dockerd (or your dockerd path) against the official Docker project hash, or use a file integrity monitoring tool to confirm the binary has not been alteredAffected if The dockerd binary has been replaced or modified, which is the prerequisite condition for this SSRF attack to be exploitable
You are affected if your GitLab Runner version is vulnerable AND you use the Docker executor AND an attacker has replaced the dockerd binary with a malicious server.
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 data13.0.1213.1.613.2.3
Upgrade GitLab Runner to version 13.0.12, 13.1.6, 13.2.3 or later. Additionally, ensure proper access controls and integrity verification for the dockerd binary to prevent unauthorized replacement.
Fix this in Runner
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-2020-13295 — 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-2020-13295 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