Skip to content

@hulumi/policies has a HULUMI-H5 bypass via decoy sibling resources targeting a different bucket

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 20, 2026 in kerberosmansour/hulumi • Updated Jun 10, 2026

Package

npm @hulumi/policies (npm)

Affected versions

< 1.4.0

Patched versions

1.4.0

Description

Affected: @hulumi/policies < 1.4.0 — Fixed in: 1.4.0 — Severity: High — CWE-284 (Improper Access Control)

Summary

HULUMI-H1 forbids raw aws:s3:Bucket outside of Hulumi's SecureBucket component, with one exemption: a raw bucket that's a child of a SecureBucket is allowed because the component is responsible for the hardening. HULUMI-H5 is the defence-in-depth check that closes the H1 exemption — for any raw bucket claiming it, H5 verifies the five hardening sibling resources a real SecureBucket always emits (public-access block, SSE-KMS, ownership controls, versioning, TLS-only bucket policy) are actually present.

The bug: H5 only checked the siblings' types. It never verified that those siblings actually applied to the bucket being exempted. A consumer (or compromised PR) could pair an unhardened raw bucket with five hardening sibling resources whose bucket property pointed at a completely different bucket, and H5 would report no violation while the actual bucket shipped with zero hardened defaults.

Impact

Consumers using HulumiHardeningPack could ship a raw S3 bucket with no public-access block, no SSE-KMS, no ownership controls, no versioning, and no TLS-only bucket policy — while the policy pack reported the stack as compliant.

Patches

Upgrade to @hulumi/policies@1.4.0. The H5 sibling check now requires both (a) the sibling to share the same parent SecureBucket instance via the anchored URN helper from GHSA-2, AND (b) the sibling's bucket property — or, for the bucket policy, its Resource ARN list — to reference the exempted bucket explicitly. Five decoy siblings pointing at a different bucket no longer count.

Workarounds

None — the exemption itself is the mechanism, so the value-binding check is the only fix.

Resources

  • PR #178 (Cluster B); decoy-sibling regression cases in packages/policies/tests/hulumi-hardening-pack.test.ts. Supersedes PR #175, which had addressed the value-binding half but on a stale base.

References

@kerberosmansour kerberosmansour published to kerberosmansour/hulumi May 20, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 10, 2026
Reviewed Jun 10, 2026
Last updated Jun 10, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability Low

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(12th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Access Control

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-48034

GHSA ID

GHSA-9vc9-4jv3-rf86

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.