Octopus

In Octopus Deploy 2018.4.4 through 2018.5.1, Octopus variables that are sourced from the target do not have sensitive values obfuscated in the deployment logs.

An issue was discovered in Octopus Deploy before 4.1.9. Any user with user editing permissions can modify teams to give themselves Administer System permissions even if they didn't have them, as demonstrated by use of the RoleEdit or TeamEdit permission.

In Octopus Deploy versions 3.2.11 - 4.1.5 (fixed in 4.1.6), an authenticated user with ProcessEdit permission could reference an Azure account in such a way as to bypass the scoping restrictions, resulting in a potential escalation of privileges.

In Octopus Deploy before 4.1.3, the machine update process doesn't check that the user has access to all environments. This allows an access-control bypass because the set of environments to which a machine is scoped may include environments in which the user lacks access.

In Octopus Deploy version 2018.5.1 to 2018.5.7, a user with Task View is able to view a password for a Service Fabric Cluster, when the Service Fabric Cluster target is configured in Azure Active Directory security mode and a deployment is executed with OctopusPrintVariables set…

In Octopus Deploy before 2018.4.7, target and tenant tag variable scopes were not checked against the list of tenants the user has access to.

Octopus before 3.17.7 allows attackers to obtain sensitive cleartext information by reading a variable JSON file in certain situations involving Offline Drop Targets.

In affected versions of the Octopus Kubernetes worker or agent, sensitive variables could be written to the Kubernetes script pod log in clear-text. This was identified in Version 2 however it was determined that this could also be achieved in Version 1 and the fix was applied…

In Octopus Deploy 3.0 onwards (before 2018.6.7), an authenticated user with incorrect permissions may be able to create Accounts under the Infrastructure menu.

In Octopus Deploy 2.0 and later before 2018.3.7, an authenticated user, with variable edit permissions, can scope some variables to targets greater than their permissions should allow. In other words, they can see machines beyond their team's scoped environments.

In Octopus before 3.17.7, an authenticated user who was explicitly granted the permission to invite new users (aka UserInvite) can invite users to teams with escalated privileges.

An issue was discovered in Octopus before 3.17.7. When the special Guest user account is granted the CertificateExportPrivateKey permission, and Guest Access is enabled for the Octopus Server, an attacker can sign in as the Guest account and export Certificates managed by…

In affected versions of Octopus Server, permissions were not checked correctly resulting in any authenticated user being able to make server level changes using a certain API endpoint despite receiving an error.

In Octopus Deploy 3.x before 3.15.4, an authenticated user with PackagePush permission to upload packages could upload a maliciously crafted NuGet package, potentially overwriting other packages or modifying system files. This is a directory traversal in the PackageId value.

In Octopus Deploy 3.4.x before 2018.4.7, an authenticated user is able to view/update/save variable values within the Tenant Variables area for Environments that do not exist within their associated Team scoping. This occurs in situations where this authenticated user also…

Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the All Variables tab in Octopus Deploy 3.4.0-3.13.6 (fixed in 3.13.7) allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the Variable Set Name parameter.

Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Octopus Deploy 3.7.0-3.17.13 (fixed in 3.17.14) allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the Step Template Name parameter.

In affected versions of Octopus Server it was possible for a low privileged user to manipulate an API request to change the signing key expiration and revocation time frames via an API endpoint that had incorrect permission validation. It was not possible to expose the signing…

In Octopus Deploy 2018.8.0 through 2018.9.x before 2018.9.1, an authenticated user with permission to modify deployment processes could upload a maliciously crafted YAML configuration, potentially allowing for remote execution of arbitrary code, running in the same context as…

In affected versions of Octopus Server with certain access levels it was possible to embed a Cross-Site Scripting Payload via artifacts.