By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00015230 / Revision 1

cel-go: JSON Private Fields Exposed via NativeTypes and ParseStructTag

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for github.com/google/cel-go. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-gcjh-h69q-9w9g

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

github.com/google/cel-go

source listed
  • >= 0.22.0, <= 0.28.1

The function `ext.NativeTypes(ParseStructTag("json"))` does not honour the `encoding/json` skip directive `json:"-"`. Fields tagged `json:"-"` are registered in the CEL type system under the literal name `"-"` and are readable from any user-submitted CEL expression via `dyn(obj)["-"]`. Additionally, `newNativeTypes` silently registers every nested struct reachable from the type passed to `NativeTypes`, including types from third-party dependencies the developer never examined. ## Root cause In `fieldNameByTag`, the helper used by `ParseStructTag("json")` to translate Go struct tags into CEL field names. See at `ext/native.go:146`: ```go func fieldNameByTag(structTagToParse string) func(field reflect.StructField) string { return func(field reflect.StructField) string { tag, found := field.Tag.Lookup(structTagToParse) if found { splits := strings.Split(tag, ",") if len(splits) > 0 { // We make the assumption that the leftmost entry in the tag is the name. // This seems to be true for most tags that have the concept of a name/key, such as: // https://pkg.go.dev/encoding/xml#Marshal

GitHub Advisory Database

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-gcjh-h69q-9w9g ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗