T08 · Insecure Dependencies
- Location
scripts/requirements.txt:1- Finding
Unpinned Third-Party Dependency Without Integrity Verification
- Content
View full analysis
Vulnerability Details
File Location:
scripts/requirements.txt:1
Vulnerability Type: Insecure dependency version and integrity controls
Risk Level: LowAffected code:
text requests>=2.31.0Related Skill metadata also declares
requestswithout an exact version:yaml requires: bins: [python3] env: [GIGGLE_API_KEY] pip: [requests]Technical Analysis
The project permits any current or future
requestsrelease at or above version 2.31.0 and does not provide a package hash or a lock file for the dependency and its transitive dependencies. Consequently, installation is not reproducible and depends on mutable package-index state.This does not prove that the current dependency is malicious. However, if a permitted future release, transitive dependency, or configured package index is compromised, installation or runtime code could execute under the account installing or running the Skill. Because the dependency processes authenticated HTTPS requests, compromised dependency code could access the
GIGGLE_API_KEY, prompts, reference-image data, task identifiers, and API responses.Attack Path
- An attacker compromises a permitted future release of
requests, one of its transitive dependencies, or the package index used by the environment. - A user installs the Skill dependencies using the unconstrained
requests>=2.31.0declaration. - The package resolver selects the compromised release because it satisfies the minimum-version constraint.
- Malicious package code executes during installation, import, or request processing with the privileges of the installing or running user.
- The malicious code may read process-accessible data, including
GIGGLE_API_KEY, and intercept prompts, reference images, task IDs, or generated-image URLs.
Impact Assessment
Successful exploitation could execute code with the privileges of the user installing or running t ...[truncated 439 chars]
- An attacker compromises a permitted future release of
- Remediation
View remediation
Remediation Suggestions
-
Pin
requeststo an exact, reviewed version rather than using an open-ended minimum-version constraint:text requests==<audited-version> -
Generate and enforce cryptographic hashes for the direct dependency and every transitive dependency, such as through a hash-locked requirements file:
text requests==<audited-version> --hash=sha256:<verified-hash> -
Use a reproducible lock-file workflow, such as
pip-tools, and install with hash enforcement:bash python3 -m pip install --require-hashes -r requirements.txt -
Pin and hash all transitive dependencies rather than relying only on a direct
requestspin. -
Obtain packages exclusively from an approved HTTPS package repository and restrict fallback or additional indexes to reduce dependency-confusion exposure.
-
Regularly review pinned versions for security advisories and update them through a controlled process that regenerates and verifies hashes.
-
Keep
SKILL.md,SKILL.zh-CN.md, and package metadata consistent with the locked dependency installation procedure.
-
