{ "api_version": "1", "kind": "dse_post", "self": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/api/v1/posts/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "item": { "id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "slug": "gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "alternate_urls": { "markdown": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy.md", "json": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/api/v1/posts/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/" }, "title": "Prevent a shared GitLab runner from reusing another project’s private image without a registry check", "summary": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.", "format": { "slug": "guide", "name": "Guide" }, "priority": { "slug": "info", "name": "Information" }, "featured": false, "image": { "theme": "cyber-defense", "label": "Cyber defense", "alt": "Layered glass and metal cyber-defense structure with controlled blue and gold signal paths.", "card_url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-card.webp?v=1.8.20", "hero_url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-hero.webp?v=1.8.20", "social_url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-social-v2.jpg?v=1.8.20", "width": 2400, "height": 1350 }, "topics": [ { "slug": "cybersecurity", "name": "Cybersecurity", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/cybersecurity/" }, { "slug": "it", "name": "IT", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/it/" } ], "author": { "name": "DSE Security Editorial Team", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#editorial-team", "type": "Organization" }, "publisher": { "name": "Detection Systems & Engineering", "url": "https://dsesecurity.com/" }, "published_at": "2026-10-15T13:33:43+00:00", "modified_at": "2026-10-15T13:36:17+00:00", "reviewed_on": "2026-10-15", "reading_minutes": 2, "word_count": 266, "potentially_affected": "This concerns self-managed GitLab runners using the relevant container executors and pull policies. It is an image-access review, not a claim that one pull-policy setting provides complete job or host isolation.", "dse_recommendation": "DSE recommends documenting which users and projects share each runner and who controls image selection.", "primary_source": { "name": "GitLab — Runner security", "url": "https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/security/", "published_on": null, "authority": "docs.gitlab.com" }, "publishing_principles": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/dse-updates-editorial-methodology/", "usage_info": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/usage/", "copyright_notice": "Copyright © 2026 Detection Systems & Engineering. All rights reserved.", "content_html": "

The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.

\n

Source facts

\n

GitLab’s runner security guide describes a private-image risk on shared runners. One user’s authorized job can pull an image into the runner’s local cache. A later user without registry access can request that image and receive the cached copy when the pull policy is if-not-present. GitLab recommends always for mixed-trust runners where users may request registry images, and reserves if-not-present for trusted dedicated use. The guide also distinguishes never for an administrator-controlled set of images already present on the runner.

\n

Source: GitLab — Runner security.

\n

Applicability

\n

This concerns self-managed GitLab runners using the relevant container executors and pull policies. It is an image-access review, not a claim that one pull-policy setting provides complete job or host isolation.

\n

DSE recommendation

\n

DSE recommends documenting which users and projects share each runner and who controls image selection. For mixed-trust use, require an appropriate registry authorization check instead of silently trusting a cached private image. For a deliberately fixed image set, review the administrator-maintained model separately. Inspect runner configuration, allowed policies, and job overrides together. Keep credential helpers and host-side registry configuration in the broader runner security review, and consider dedicated execution capacity for workloads with incompatible trust requirements.

\n

Verification

\n

Using a disposable private image and two test identities, verify the chosen policy with a warm cache and with no cache. Confirm that an identity lacking registry permission cannot obtain the cached private image through the shared runner. Remove the test image and credentials afterward.

\n

Official reference

\n

GitLab — Runner security. Reviewed October 15, 2026.

", "content_text": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.\nSource facts\nGitLab’s runner security guide describes a private-image risk on shared runners. One user’s authorized job can pull an image into the runner’s local cache. A later user without registry access can request that image and receive the cached copy when the pull policy is if-not-present. GitLab recommends always for mixed-trust runners where users may request registry images, and reserves if-not-present for trusted dedicated use. The guide also distinguishes never for an administrator-controlled set of images already present on the runner.\nSource: GitLab — Runner security.\nApplicability\nThis concerns self-managed GitLab runners using the relevant container executors and pull policies. It is an image-access review, not a claim that one pull-policy setting provides complete job or host isolation.\nDSE recommendation\nDSE recommends documenting which users and projects share each runner and who controls image selection. For mixed-trust use, require an appropriate registry authorization check instead of silently trusting a cached private image. For a deliberately fixed image set, review the administrator-maintained model separately. Inspect runner configuration, allowed policies, and job overrides together. Keep credential helpers and host-side registry configuration in the broader runner security review, and consider dedicated execution capacity for workloads with incompatible trust requirements.\nVerification\nUsing a disposable private image and two test identities, verify the chosen policy with a warm cache and with no cache. Confirm that an identity lacking registry permission cannot obtain the cached private image through the shared runner. Remove the test image and credentials afterward.\nOfficial reference\nGitLab — Runner security. Reviewed October 15, 2026.", "content_markdown": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.\n\n## Source facts\n\nGitLab’s runner security guide describes a private-image risk on shared runners. One user’s authorized job can pull an image into the runner’s local cache. A later user without registry access can request that image and receive the cached copy when the pull policy is if-not-present. GitLab recommends always for mixed-trust runners where users may request registry images, and reserves if-not-present for trusted dedicated use. The guide also distinguishes never for an administrator-controlled set of images already present on the runner.\n\nSource: [GitLab — Runner security](https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/security/).\n\n## Applicability\n\nThis concerns self-managed GitLab runners using the relevant container executors and pull policies. It is an image-access review, not a claim that one pull-policy setting provides complete job or host isolation.\n\n## DSE recommendation\n\nDSE recommends documenting which users and projects share each runner and who controls image selection. For mixed-trust use, require an appropriate registry authorization check instead of silently trusting a cached private image. For a deliberately fixed image set, review the administrator-maintained model separately. Inspect runner configuration, allowed policies, and job overrides together. Keep credential helpers and host-side registry configuration in the broader runner security review, and consider dedicated execution capacity for workloads with incompatible trust requirements.\n\n## Verification\n\nUsing a disposable private image and two test identities, verify the chosen policy with a warm cache and with no cache. Confirm that an identity lacking registry permission cannot obtain the cached private image through the shared runner. Remove the test image and credentials afterward.\n\n## Official reference\n\n[GitLab — Runner security](https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/security/). Reviewed October 15, 2026." }, "json_ld": { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@graph": [ { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization", "name": "Detection Systems & Engineering", "alternateName": "DSE Security", "url": "https://dsesecurity.com/", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/dse-logo-20260812.png?v=1.8.20" } }, { "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#editorial-team", "name": "DSE Security Editorial Team", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/", "parentOrganization": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" } }, { "@type": "WebSite", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#website", "name": "DSE Updates", "alternateName": "DSE Security Knowledge Hub", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/", "inLanguage": "en-US", "publisher": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "potentialAction": { "@type": "SearchAction", "target": { "@type": "EntryPoint", "urlTemplate": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/?q={search_term_string}" }, "query-input": "required name=search_term_string" } }, { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "isPartOf": { "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#website" }, "lastReviewed": "2026-10-15" }, { "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/#breadcrumbs", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "DSE Updates", "item": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/" }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Prevent a shared GitLab runner from reusing another project’s private image without a registry check", "item": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/" } ] }, { "@type": [ "Article", "TechArticle" ], "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/#article", "identifier": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/", "headline": "Prevent a shared GitLab runner from reusing another project’s private image without a registry check", "description": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.", "abstract": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.", "articleBody": "The if-not-present pull policy can cross an authorization boundary through the local image cache.\nSource facts\nGitLab’s runner security guide describes a private-image risk on shared runners. One user’s authorized job can pull an image into the runner’s local cache. A later user without registry access can request that image and receive the cached copy when the pull policy is if-not-present. GitLab recommends always for mixed-trust runners where users may request registry images, and reserves if-not-present for trusted dedicated use. The guide also distinguishes never for an administrator-controlled set of images already present on the runner.\nSource: GitLab — Runner security.\nApplicability\nThis concerns self-managed GitLab runners using the relevant container executors and pull policies. It is an image-access review, not a claim that one pull-policy setting provides complete job or host isolation.\nDSE recommendation\nDSE recommends documenting which users and projects share each runner and who controls image selection. For mixed-trust use, require an appropriate registry authorization check instead of silently trusting a cached private image. For a deliberately fixed image set, review the administrator-maintained model separately. Inspect runner configuration, allowed policies, and job overrides together. Keep credential helpers and host-side registry configuration in the broader runner security review, and consider dedicated execution capacity for workloads with incompatible trust requirements.\nVerification\nUsing a disposable private image and two test identities, verify the chosen policy with a warm cache and with no cache. Confirm that an identity lacking registry permission cannot obtain the cached private image through the shared runner. Remove the test image and credentials afterward.\nOfficial reference\nGitLab — Runner security. Reviewed October 15, 2026.", "datePublished": "2026-10-15T13:33:43+00:00", "dateModified": "2026-10-15T13:36:17+00:00", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/" }, "inLanguage": "en-US", "isAccessibleForFree": true, "author": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "DSE Security Editorial Team", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/#editorial-team" }, "publisher": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "@id": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/gitlab-shared-runner-private-image-pull-policy/#primaryimage", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-social-v2.jpg?v=1.8.20", "contentUrl": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/assets/editorial/cyber-defense-social-v2.jpg?v=1.8.20", "width": 1200, "height": 630, "caption": "Prevent a shared GitLab runner from reusing another project’s private image without a registry check" }, "articleSection": [ "Cybersecurity", "IT" ], "keywords": [ "Cybersecurity", "IT", "Guide", "Information priority" ], "genre": "Guide", "about": [ { "@type": "Thing", "name": "Cybersecurity", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/cybersecurity/" }, { "@type": "Thing", "name": "IT", "url": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/topic/it/" } ], "wordCount": 266, "timeRequired": "PT2M", "publishingPrinciples": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/updates/dse-updates-editorial-methodology/", "usageInfo": "https://update.dsesecurity.com/usage/", "copyrightHolder": { "@id": "https://dsesecurity.com/#organization" }, "copyrightNotice": "Copyright © 2026 Detection Systems & Engineering. All rights reserved.", "citation": { "@type": "CreativeWork", "name": "GitLab — Runner security", "url": "https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/security/" } } ] } }