Skip to content

[GHSA-37w4-hwhx-4rc4] JupyterHub has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request#7593

Open
krassowski wants to merge 1 commit intokrassowski/advisory-improvement-7593from
krassowski-GHSA-37w4-hwhx-4rc4
Open

[GHSA-37w4-hwhx-4rc4] JupyterHub has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request#7593
krassowski wants to merge 1 commit intokrassowski/advisory-improvement-7593from
krassowski-GHSA-37w4-hwhx-4rc4

Conversation

@krassowski
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@krassowski krassowski commented May 6, 2026

Updates

  • Description
  • Summary

Comments
The GitHub curators incorrectly titled this as JupyterHub vulnerability; this is Jupyter>Lab< vulnerability. JupyterHub is one way in which JupyterLab is distributed, but it can be problematic in other contexts (e.g. when someone uses plain jupyter-server for multi-tenant deployment, even though this is strongly discouraged by official documentation).

I also fixed the 4.5.X placeholder in summary (which I also updated in the project-level version)

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings May 6, 2026 08:35
@github
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

github commented May 6, 2026

Hi there @krassowski! A community member has suggested an improvement to your security advisory. If approved, this change will affect the global advisory listed at github.com/advisories. It will not affect the version listed in your project repository.

This change will be reviewed by our Security Curation Team. If you have thoughts or feedback, please share them in a comment here! If this PR has already been closed, you can start a new community contribution for this advisory

@github-actions github-actions Bot changed the base branch from main to krassowski/advisory-improvement-7593 May 6, 2026 08:36
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the GHSA advisory metadata to correctly attribute the vulnerability to JupyterLab (rather than JupyterHub) and refines the affected-version wording in the advisory details.

Changes:

  • Updates the advisory summary to refer to JupyterLab instead of JupyterHub.
  • Clarifies the vulnerable version range language in the details (now explicitly “prior to 4.5.7”).
  • Updates the modified timestamp.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

],
"summary": "JupyterHub has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request",
"details": "The allow-list of extensions that can be installed from PyPI Extension Manager (`allowed_extensions_uris`) is not correctly enforced by JupyterLab prior to 4.5.X. The PyPI Extension Manager was not contained to packages listed on the default PyPI index.\n\nThis has security implications for deployments that:\n- have allow-listed specific extensions with aim to prevent users from installing packages\n- have the kernel and terminals disabled or delegated to remote hosts (thus no access to install packages in the single-user server environment)\n- have multi-tenant deployments that is not configured for untrusted users (as per documented on JupyterHub https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html)\n- have the (default) PyPI Extension Manger enabled\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated attacker - such as a student in a shared JupyterHub environment or a user in a multi-tenant JupyterLab deployment - can escalate their privileges. This might allow for data exfiltration, lateral movement within the network, and persistent compromise of the server infrastructure.\n\n### Patches\n\nJupyterLab [`v4.5.7`](https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab/releases/tag/v4.5.7) contains the patch.\n\nUsers of applications that depend on JupyterLab, such as Notebook v7+, should update `jupyterlab` package too.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nSwitch to read-only extension manager by adding the following command line option:\n\n```bash\n--LabApp.extension_manager=readonly\n```\n\nor the following traitlet:\n\n```python\nc.LabApp.extension_manager = 'readonly'\n```\n\nYou can confirm that the read-only manager is in use from GUI:\n\n<img width=\"293\" height=\"293\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8016c809-633e-4ed0-a5bc-6bc4793caa0f\" />\n\nNote: configuration of a PyPI proxy with allow-listed packages is not sufficient to protect from this vulnerability.\n\n### Resources\n\n- allow-list https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/stable/user/extensions.html#listing-configuration\n- https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html\n- https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/extensions.html#extension-manager-implementations",
"summary": "JupyterLab has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request",
"summary": "JupyterHub has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request",
"details": "The allow-list of extensions that can be installed from PyPI Extension Manager (`allowed_extensions_uris`) is not correctly enforced by JupyterLab prior to 4.5.X. The PyPI Extension Manager was not contained to packages listed on the default PyPI index.\n\nThis has security implications for deployments that:\n- have allow-listed specific extensions with aim to prevent users from installing packages\n- have the kernel and terminals disabled or delegated to remote hosts (thus no access to install packages in the single-user server environment)\n- have multi-tenant deployments that is not configured for untrusted users (as per documented on JupyterHub https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html)\n- have the (default) PyPI Extension Manger enabled\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated attacker - such as a student in a shared JupyterHub environment or a user in a multi-tenant JupyterLab deployment - can escalate their privileges. This might allow for data exfiltration, lateral movement within the network, and persistent compromise of the server infrastructure.\n\n### Patches\n\nJupyterLab [`v4.5.7`](https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab/releases/tag/v4.5.7) contains the patch.\n\nUsers of applications that depend on JupyterLab, such as Notebook v7+, should update `jupyterlab` package too.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nSwitch to read-only extension manager by adding the following command line option:\n\n```bash\n--LabApp.extension_manager=readonly\n```\n\nor the following traitlet:\n\n```python\nc.LabApp.extension_manager = 'readonly'\n```\n\nYou can confirm that the read-only manager is in use from GUI:\n\n<img width=\"293\" height=\"293\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8016c809-633e-4ed0-a5bc-6bc4793caa0f\" />\n\nNote: configuration of a PyPI proxy with allow-listed packages is not sufficient to protect from this vulnerability.\n\n### Resources\n\n- allow-list https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/stable/user/extensions.html#listing-configuration\n- https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html\n- https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/extensions.html#extension-manager-implementations",
"summary": "JupyterLab has an Extension Manager API/GUI Policy Discrepancy, allowing 3rd party (malicious) extensions install via POST request",
"details": "The allow-list of extensions that can be installed from PyPI Extension Manager (`allowed_extensions_uris`) is not correctly enforced by JupyterLab prior to 4.5.7. The PyPI Extension Manager was not contained to packages listed on the default PyPI index.\n\nThis has security implications for deployments that:\n- have allow-listed specific extensions with aim to prevent users from installing packages\n- have the kernel and terminals disabled or delegated to remote hosts (thus no access to install packages in the single-user server environment)\n- have multi-tenant deployments that is not configured for untrusted users (as per documented on JupyterHub https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html)\n- have the (default) PyPI Extension Manger enabled\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated attacker - such as a student in a shared JupyterHub environment or a user in a multi-tenant JupyterLab deployment - can escalate their privileges. This might allow for data exfiltration, lateral movement within the network, and persistent compromise of the server infrastructure.\n\n### Patches\n\nJupyterLab [`v4.5.7`](https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab/releases/tag/v4.5.7) contains the patch.\n\nUsers of applications that depend on JupyterLab, such as Notebook v7+, should update `jupyterlab` package too.\n\n### Workarounds\n\nSwitch to read-only extension manager by adding the following command line option:\n\n```bash\n--LabApp.extension_manager=readonly\n```\n\nor the following traitlet:\n\n```python\nc.LabApp.extension_manager = 'readonly'\n```\n\nYou can confirm that the read-only manager is in use from GUI:\n\n<img width=\"293\" height=\"293\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8016c809-633e-4ed0-a5bc-6bc4793caa0f\" />\n\nNote: configuration of a PyPI proxy with allow-listed packages is not sufficient to protect from this vulnerability.\n\n### Resources\n\n- allow-list https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/stable/user/extensions.html#listing-configuration\n- https://jupyterhub.readthedocs.io/en/5.2.1/explanation/websecurity.html\n- https://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/extensions.html#extension-manager-implementations",
@krassowski
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I cannot apply suggestions and I think they don't matter, what matters is fixing the title as it is quite wrong. Can a human review this please?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants