[HN Gopher] Supply Chain Vuln Compromised Core AWS GitHub Repos ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Supply Chain Vuln Compromised Core AWS GitHub Repos & Threatened
       the AWS Console
        
       Author : uvuv
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2026-01-15 17:30 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.wiz.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.wiz.io)
        
       | chuckadams wrote:
       | Breaking this down, several of AWS's core repos like the JS SDK
       | use an allowlist of which contributor ids can run workflow
       | actions in their PRs. The list was a regex, contained several
       | short ids, and wasn't anchored with ^$, so if it allowed user
       | 12345, then any userid _containing_ 12345 could run their own
       | actions on the PR, including one that exfiltrated access tokens.
       | So they spammed GH with user creation requests, got an id that
       | matched, and they were in like Flynn.
       | 
       | Said tokens didn't have admin access, but had enough privileges
       | to invite other users to become full admins. Not sure if they
       | were rotated, but github tokens are usually long-lived, like up
       | to a year. Hey, isn't AWS the one always lecturing us to use
       | temporary credentials? To be fair, AWS did more than just fix the
       | regex, they introduced an "approve workflow run" UI unto the PR
       | process that I think GH is also using now (not sure about that).
        
         | cyberax wrote:
         | > Said tokens didn't have admin access, but had enough
         | privileges to invite other users to become full admins.
         | 
         | Ah... Github permissions. What fun.
         | 
         | Github actually has a way to federate with AWS for short-lived
         | credentials, but then it screws everything up by completely
         | half-assing the ghcr.io implementation. It's only available
         | using the old deprecated classic access tokens.
        
         | bflesch wrote:
         | At least the vuln was old enough so that they couldn't blame AI
         | for it, otherwise the article would read different ;)
        
         | TacticalCoder wrote:
         | > The list was a regex ...
         | 
         | Regexpes for security allow lists: what could possibly every go
         | wrong uh!?
        
         | whatever1 wrote:
         | Another success story for Regexes! Let's keep using this
         | cryptic mess!
        
           | pxc wrote:
           | I met regexes when I was 13, I think. I spent a little time
           | reading the Java API docs on the language's regex
           | implementation and played with a couple of regex testing
           | websites during an introductory programming class at that
           | age. I've used them for the rest of my life without any
           | difficulty. Strict (formal) regexes are extremely simple, and
           | even when using crazy implementations that allow all kinds of
           | backreferences and conditionals, 99.999% of regexes in the
           | wild are extremely simple as well. And that's true in the
           | example from TFA! There's nothing tricky or cryptic about
           | this regex.
           | 
           | That said, what this regex wanted to be was obviously just a
           | list. AWS should offer simpler abstractions (like lists)
           | where they make sense.
        
       | McAdam wrote:
       | happens to the best of us
        
       | teeklp wrote:
       | Oh no, is the AWS Console ok?
        
       | mikesurowiec wrote:
       | I worked on docs at GitHub which are open source, synced to an
       | internal repo, and deployed on internal infra. I recall jumping
       | through many hoops to make it work safely. These were workflows
       | that had secrets access for deployments, and I recall zipping
       | files, doing some weird handoffs/file filtering between different
       | workflows based on the triggers and permissions. Security folks
       | were really quick to find any gaps =)
       | 
       | Glad to see a few more security knobs on actions these days!
        
       | themafia wrote:
       | I always wondered if their decision to limit availability of
       | CodeCommit had something to do with the overall quality of the
       | underlying implementation. It always came off as an "also ran"
       | product without any real care or effort put into it. Either that
       | or the team responsible for creating it ultimately left the
       | company.. anyways..
       | 
       | This article lends some credibility to that notion.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-01-15 23:00 UTC)