FKIE_CVE-2026-25153
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-01-30 22:15 - Updated: 2026-02-19 15:26
Severity ?
7.7 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:L
8.8 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
8.8 (High) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Summary
Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node provides common node.js functionalities for TechDocs. In versions of @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node prior to 1.13.11 and 1.14.1, when TechDocs is configured with `runIn: local`, a malicious actor who can submit or modify a repository's `mkdocs.yml` file can execute arbitrary Python code on the TechDocs build server via MkDocs hooks configuration. @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node versions 1.13.11 and 1.14.1 contain a fix. The fix introduces an allowlist of supported MkDocs configuration keys. Unsupported configuration keys (including `hooks`) are now removed from `mkdocs.yml` before running the generator, with a warning logged to indicate which keys were removed. Users of `@techdocs/cli` should also upgrade to the latest version, which includes the fixed `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` dependency. Some workarounds are available. Configure TechDocs with `runIn: docker` instead of `runIn: local` to provide container isolation, though it does not fully mitigate the risk. Limit who can modify `mkdocs.yml` files in repositories that TechDocs processes; only allow trusted contributors. Implement PR review requirements for changes to `mkdocs.yml` files to detect malicious `hooks` configurations before they are merged. Use MkDocs < 1.4.0 (e.g., 1.3.1) which does not support hooks. Note: This may limit access to newer MkDocs features. Building documentation in CI/CD pipelines using `@techdocs/cli` does not mitigate this vulnerability, as the CLI uses the same vulnerable `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` package.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| linuxfoundation | backstage | * | |
| linuxfoundation | backstage | * |
{
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:linuxfoundation:backstage:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "086F7DE4-8356-4AE3-9E29-B852A5C4B2DB",
"versionEndExcluding": "1.13.11",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:linuxfoundation:backstage:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "0393AC7C-1889-4869-ABAF-1C5D96CA2C06",
"versionEndExcluding": "1.14.1",
"versionStartIncluding": "1.14.0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node provides common node.js functionalities for TechDocs. In versions of @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node prior to 1.13.11 and 1.14.1, when TechDocs is configured with `runIn: local`, a malicious actor who can submit or modify a repository\u0027s `mkdocs.yml` file can execute arbitrary Python code on the TechDocs build server via MkDocs hooks configuration. @backstage/plugin-techdocs-node versions 1.13.11 and 1.14.1 contain a fix. The fix introduces an allowlist of supported MkDocs configuration keys. Unsupported configuration keys (including `hooks`) are now removed from `mkdocs.yml` before running the generator, with a warning logged to indicate which keys were removed. Users of `@techdocs/cli` should also upgrade to the latest version, which includes the fixed `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` dependency. Some workarounds are available. Configure TechDocs with `runIn: docker` instead of `runIn: local` to provide container isolation, though it does not fully mitigate the risk. Limit who can modify `mkdocs.yml` files in repositories that TechDocs processes; only allow trusted contributors. Implement PR review requirements for changes to `mkdocs.yml` files to detect malicious `hooks` configurations before they are merged. Use MkDocs \u003c 1.4.0 (e.g., 1.3.1) which does not support hooks. Note: This may limit access to newer MkDocs features. Building documentation in CI/CD pipelines using `@techdocs/cli` does not mitigate this vulnerability, as the CLI uses the same vulnerable `@backstage/plugin-techdocs-node` package."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-25153",
"lastModified": "2026-02-19T15:26:37.430",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "LOW",
"baseScore": 7.7,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "LOW",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "CHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:L",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.8,
"impactScore": 5.3,
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
},
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 8.8,
"baseSeverity": "HIGH",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
"impactScore": 5.9,
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
},
"published": "2026-01-30T22:15:56.343",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"tags": [
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://github.com/backstage/backstage/security/advisories/GHSA-6jr7-99pf-8vgf"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-94"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…