GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4

GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 is a medium-severity security vulnerability in github.com/rclone/rclone (go), affecting versions <= 1.74.0. It is fixed in 1.75.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

rclone: S3 Redirect Sanitization Omits IBM IAM Bearer Tokens and SSE-C Keys

1. Summary

The S3 redirect callback strips X-Amz-Security-Token when a redirect changes scheme or host, but it does not strip IBM IAM bearer authorization or customer-provided encryption keys. Two independently validated paths remain:

  • a same-host HTTPS-to-HTTP redirect preserves Authorization: Bearer ... and exposes a reusable IBM IAM token to the plaintext network path;
  • a cross-origin redirect preserves SSE-C and copy-source SSE-C key headers.

The High rating is driven by the reusable IBM IAM bearer token. The SSE-C cross-origin disclosure is a secondary confidentiality issue. The meaningful threat is a trusted endpoint, gateway, or accelerator that emits an unsafe redirect, followed by an adjacent/on-path observer; describing the originally configured endpoint itself as the attacker would be weak because that endpoint already receives the request secrets.

2. Affected Assets & Attack Surface

  • S3 redirect policy: backend/s3/s3.go:1345-1379
  • IBM IAM signer: backend/s3/ibm_signer.go:28-40
  • SSE-C key preparation: backend/s3/s3.go:1821-1837
  • Affected operations: requests carrying IBM IAM authorization, SSE-C keys, or copy-source SSE-C keys
  • Confirmed affected version: <= v1.74.0-240-ga0c09f138

3. Technical Root Cause Analysis

s3CheckRedirect applies a one-header denylist:

if s3RedirectCrossesHost(req, via) {
    req.Header.Del("X-Amz-Security-Token")
}

Go removes Authorization on some hostname changes, but preserves it for a same-host redirect and does not treat a scheme downgrade as sufficient reason to remove it. Go also has no generic knowledge that the SSE-C headers contain raw encryption keys. The rclone callback recognizes the STS token but not these additional origin-bound secrets.

4. Proof-of-Concept & Evidence

Using the actual redirect callback:

  1. An HTTPS endpoint redirected to HTTP on the same hostname.
  2. The plaintext destination received the planted IBM bearer token and SSE-C headers.
  3. A separate redirect to an unrelated hostname caused Go to remove Authorization, but the destination still received both SSE-C key headers.
  4. In both cases, rclone removed the planted STS token, proving that the S3-specific callback executed while omitting the other secret classes.

The related GHSA-gx4c-2hqx-cw2r covers the STS downgrade path and confirms that rclone treats scheme changes as a credential boundary. It does not cover the IBM bearer or SSE-C variants retained here.

5. Impact Assessment

A captured IBM bearer token can authorize reads, writes, and deletes within its IAM scope. A disclosed SSE-C key can expose corresponding ciphertext available to the recipient; copy-source keys can expose protected source objects. The exact impact is limited by token policy and the attacker's access to encrypted objects.

6. Remediation Guidance

  • Reject every HTTPS-to-HTTP redirect before replay.
  • Do not automatically follow secret-bearing cross-origin redirects.
  • On any scheme, host, or effective-port change, remove all authorization, cookies, session tokens, SSE-C fields, copy-source SSE-C fields, and provider-specific credentials.
  • Where redirects are required, allowlist exact destinations and reconstruct/re-sign a new request.
  • Add redirect tests for every secret header class and for scheme, hostname, subdomain, and port changes.

Impact

GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 has a CVSS score of 5.3 (Medium). The vector is reachable from an adjacent network, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (1.75.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/rclone/rclone (<= 1.74.0)

Security releases

github.com/rclone/rclone → 1.75.0 (go)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Upgrade github.com/rclone/rclone to 1.75.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4? GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 is a medium-severity security vulnerability in github.com/rclone/rclone (go), affecting versions <= 1.74.0. It is fixed in 1.75.0.
  2. How severe is GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4? GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 has a CVSS score of 5.3 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of github.com/rclone/rclone are affected by GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4? github.com/rclone/rclone (go) versions <= 1.74.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4? Yes. GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 is fixed in 1.75.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix GHSA-8MXV-9XHP-86H4? Upgrade github.com/rclone/rclone to 1.75.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in github.com/rclone/rclone

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.