Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-49013 is a critical-severity Code Injection (CWE-94) vulnerability in Github (inferred from references). Its CVSS base score is 9.9 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique JavaScript (T1059.007); ranked at the 48th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-49013 is a critical code injection vulnerability affecting multiple repositories under the WilderForge organization, including WilderForge/WilderForge, WilderForge/ExampleMod, WilderForge/WilderWorkspace, WilderForge/WildermythGameProvider, WilderForge/AutoSplitter, WilderForge/SpASM, WilderForge/thrixlvault, WilderForge/MassHash, and WilderForge/DLC_Disabler. The root cause is unsafe interpolation of untrusted inputs such as `${{ github.event.review.body }}` and similar GitHub context variables directly into shell script steps within GitHub Actions workflows, which permits arbitrary command execution when those values are processed by the runner.
An authenticated contributor can exploit the flaw by submitting a crafted pull request review containing shell metacharacters or commands. Successful injection grants the attacker arbitrary command execution on the GitHub Actions runner with the workflow’s permissions, enabling theft of repository secrets, tampering with build artifacts, or further compromise of the CI infrastructure. Only developers maintaining or forking the listed repositories and reusing the affected workflows are impacted; end users of pre-built releases are unaffected.
Public references, including the GitHub Security Advisory and official hardening documentation, recommend disabling GitHub Actions or removing the vulnerable workflow files as immediate workarounds while emphasizing the need to avoid direct use of untrusted event data in shell contexts. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0153 with no material increase since disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-17466
Vulnerability Data
WilderForge is a Wildermyth coremodding API. A critical vulnerability has been identified in multiple projects across the WilderForge organization. The issue arises from unsafe usage of `${{ github.event.review.body }}` and other user controlled variables directly inside shell script contexts in…
more
GitHub Actions workflows. This introduces a code injection vulnerability: a malicious actor submitting a crafted pull request review containing shell metacharacters or commands could execute arbitrary shell code on the GitHub Actions runner. This can lead to arbitrary command execution with the permissions of the workflow, potentially compromising CI infrastructure, secrets, and build outputs. Developers who maintain or contribute to the repos WilderForge/WilderForge, WilderForge/ExampleMod, WilderForge/WilderWorkspace, WilderForge/WildermythGameProvider, WilderForge/AutoSplitter, WilderForge/SpASM, WilderForge/thrixlvault, WilderForge/MassHash, and/or WilderForge/DLC_Disabler; as well as users who fork any of the above repositories and reuse affected GitHub Actions workflows, are affected. End users of any the above software and users who only install pre-built releases or artifacts are not affected. This vulnerability does not impact runtime behavior of the software or compiled outputs unless those outputs were produced during exploitation of this vulnerability. A current workaround is to disable GitHub Actions in affected repositories, or remove the affected workflows.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.1.2V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation finds code paths that accept and execute externally influenced strings.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from being used to construct executable code without neutralization.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented secure development standards and tools enforces use of safe code-generation APIs and escaping.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly target injection flaws via secure coding and testing (mostly), yet as a single broad outcome it leaves many code-generation specifics unaddressed (partial).
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure coding standards explicitly require correct output encoding and escaping to preserve message structure.
Security testing in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.
Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.
Separation of environments limits the blast radius if eval injection occurs in non-production.