Bug 2512374 (CVE-2026-71464)

Summary:	CVE-2026-71464 automation-controller: automation-controller-container: automation-controller: Schedule and WorkflowJobTemplateNode scm_branch prompt bypasses leading-dash git-argument guard
Product:	[Other] Security Response	Reporter:	OSIDB Bzimport <bzimport>
Component:	vulnerability	Assignee:	Product Security <prodsec-ir-bot>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	unspecified	CC:	dschmidt, ikhan, jlanda, kshier, rbobbitt, security-response-team, simaishi, stcannon, teagle, yguenane
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Security
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	---
Doc Text:	LaunchConfigurationBaseSerializer.scm_branch has no validate_scm_branch() leading-dash check, unlike Project/JobTemplate/JobLaunch serializers. Schedule and WFJT Node accept --upload-pack=/bin/id as scm_branch. Currently blocked at runtime by jobs.py:1502 ValueError check (defense-in-depth), but the API validation gap means sole reliance on a task-layer guard. Refactoring that guard away would promote this to RCE.	Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Deadline:	2026-09-06

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2026-08-06 23:28:45 UTC

A flaw was found in automation-controller. The LaunchConfigurationBaseSerializer used by Schedule and WorkflowJobTemplateNode does not implement 
  ▎ validate_scm_branch() to reject leading-dash values, unlike the Project, JobTemplate, and JobLaunch serializers. An attacker can set scm_branch to a value such as --upload-pack=/bin/id via the schedule or workflow node API. The injection is currently blocked by a runtime ValueError check in the task layer, but the API validation gap creates a latent risk if that defense-in-depth guard is ever refactored away.

Comment 1 Jon Orris 2026-09-23 20:49:49 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 10
  Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.6 for RHEL 9

Via RHSA-2026:71113 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:71113

Comment 2 Jon Orris 2026-09-23 21:06:45 UTC

This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 9
  Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 2.5 for RHEL 8

Via RHSA-2026:71114 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:71114