GitbucketApplication · Jenkins
CVE-2024-28157
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 · uneditedJenkins GitBucket Plugin 0.8 and earlier does not sanitize Gitbucket URLs on build views, resulting in a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability exploitable by attackers able to configure jobs.
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 confidenceThe Jenkins GitBucket Plugin version 0.8 and earlier fails to sanitize GitBucket URLs displayed on build views, allowing stored XSS injection. Attackers with job configuration permissions can embed malicious scripts in GitBucket URLs that execute when other users view build pages.
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
GitbucketApplication
<= 0.8CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/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.
-
Verify GitBucket plugin is installedNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Manage Plugins > Installed tab, or use the Jenkins CLI: jenkins-cli.jar groovy = pluginManager.getPlugin('gitbucket').Affected if The GitBucket plugin appears in the installed plugins list.
-
Check installed GitBucket plugin versionIn Manage Plugins > Installed, locate the GitBucket plugin and read the Version column. Compare against affected range: versions 0.8 and earlier.Affected if The installed version is 0.8 or lower.
-
Identify jobs using GitBucket configurationNavigate to Jenkins > Manage Jenkins > Script Console and run: Jenkins.instance.allItems.findAll { it instanceof hudson.model.FreeStyleProject }.collect { [name: it.name, gitbucket: it.scm.getDescriptor().getDisplayName()] }. Find jobs where the GitBucket SCM source is configured.Affected if Any job is configured to use the GitBucket plugin as an SCM source.
-
Inspect GitBucket URL configuration in job configsOpen a job using GitBucket > Configure > Source Code Management > GitBucket. Examine the Repository URL field for unsanitized or suspicious content.Affected if The GitBucket URL field contains JavaScript code, HTML tags, or unexpected characters that should have been sanitized.
You are affected if the GitBucket plugin version is 0.8 or earlier AND at least one job is configured with GitBucket URLs that could contain injected scripts.
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 to a patched version of the GitBucket plugin. Until then, restrict job configuration permissions to trusted users only and implement Content Security Policy headers.
Fix this in Gitbucket
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-28157 — 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-2024-28157 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