Joe Leon

The Dig

September 5, 2023

4,500 of the Top 1 Million Websites Leaked Source Code, Secrets

4,500 of the Top 1 Million Websites Leaked Source Code, Secrets

Joe Leon

September 5, 2023

This research was done in collaboration with Harsh Bothra and Luke Stephens from Hackercontent.

We scanned the Alexa Top 1 Million Websites for leaked secrets. We found thousands of exposed source code repositories and hundreds of live API keys.

These are our top 5 takeaways:

4,500 Heavily Visited Websites Publicly Exposed Source Code

Our research team discovered 4,500 of the most visited websites in the world publicly exposed their git directory (ie

These git directories often contained the entire private source code for a given website. Attackers could use this inside knowledge to mount an attack against the victim’s web application or search the code for live credentials to third-party services like AWS.

AWS and GitHub Keys were the Most Frequently Leaked Secrets

Most Frequently Leaked Credentials

AWS and GitHub keys accounted for 45% of all leaked credentials. 

You might be wondering why there are so many GitHub tokens. That’s because these tokens often land in the Git config file during remote repository cloning. (For more details see the Identifying Exposed Git Directories section below.)

Third-party email marketing services (like Mailgun, SendInBlue, Mailchimp, and Sendgrid) accounted for a large percentage of the leaked keys as well.

67% of GitHub Credentials had Admin Access

TruffleHog verifies valid GitHub credentials by making a simple GET request to GitHub’s /user API endpoint. The response returns the permissions granted to that Personal Access Token (PAT) in the X-OAuth-Scopes header.

Many GitHub Tokens Contained Administrative Rights

After reviewing the permissions granted to each valid GitHub PAT, we discovered the majority (67%) had admin-level privileges. All (100%) had repo permissions, which would enable an attacker to take arbitrary actions against all of the victim user’s repositories, including, but not limited to implanting malware in the code.

A Website Leaked their SSL Certificate Private Key

TruffleHog identified one private RSA key. We ran that key through Driftwood, our new private key usage verification tool, and discovered that the RSA key corresponded to that domain’s TLS certificate.

Verifying a Website’s Private TLS Key

Attackers could have used this private key to conduct a man-in-the-middle attack, among other malicious actions against that domain.

Fluctuating Exposure of Git Directories Across Organizations

We conducted two rounds of research, one month apart, against the same list of 1 Million websites. The first round returned 255 leaked keys. The second round returned 97 leaked keys. Our research team attributes this discrepancy to the natural ebb and flow of vulnerabilities: some websites removed their .git directories, while others leaked new keys. 

If we repeated this study, we would undoubtedly get different results; however, at a minimum, we’d most likely identify a few hundred leaked keys.

We followed industry standards and attempted to notify all impacted organizations and individuals about their exposed data. While we don’t share which websites exposed their git directories (and secrets data), below we share our research approach.

What is a .git Directory?

A .git directory is created when a Git repository is initialized. This directory generally contains code commits, commit messages, file paths, and other version control information. Essentially, git holds all the “plumbing” for a source code repository. Publicly exposing a .git directory enables an attacker to gain access to:

  • Source code: The entire source code of a project may be exposed, including proprietary algorithms, custom-built software, and trade secrets.

  • Configuration files: .git/CONFIG files often contain the password to the Git repo.

  • Commit history: The commit history of a repository can provide insight into an organization’s past mistakes, and internal service names.

  • Access credentials: If credentials are stored in git, a copy is also stored in the /.git directory. Attackers can use them to access systems and data. Often attackers will identify credentials from past commits.

Identifying Exposed Git Directories

Discovering Git directories on a list of public websites seemed like a simple task. Unfortunately, we couldn’t just cURL an HTTP GET request to /.git and record all HTTP 200 responses. Many of the Alexa Top 1 Million websites used a Web Application Firewall (WAF), which returned unpredictable results. Additionally, some sites returned a HTTP 403 (Forbidden) response when querying the /.git path; however, we could access all subdirectories and files underneath the /.git folder.

Our research team reviewed Git’s official documentation and determined that identifying a /.git/CONFIG file would provide the most reliable determination that a website exposed a valid Git directory. We requested each site’s Git CONFIG file (ie: and then reviewed the first line of text to determine whether we retrieved a valid Git CONFIG file.

Note: Git config files often house credentials. When running the following command, the git password will live inside the config file:


Example Git CONFIG File Storing Cleartext Credentials

Here’s a link to the type of Python script we used to conduct the CONFIG file testing.

Reconstructing Project Source

Downloading a complete Git repository seemed like another simple task (just git clone, right?). Unfortunately, there were many edge-cases to consider, such as corrupted repos. To reconstruct the Git repositories and clone them to our local machine, we decided on the open-source tool Goop. We found Goop to be mostly feature-complete and very efficient.

Running Goop is extremely simple; pass the URL as the only command-line argument.

Command: ./goop <url>

Running Goop Successfully

If Goop can extract a Git repository, it will create a new folder titled with the target URL’s name and include all of the available project source code / version control information.

Running TruffleHog to Find Exposed Secrets in Git

TruffleHog scans git repositories (and other sources) to identify sensitive data like keys, tokens, and passwords. When TruffleHog identifies a secret (we currently detect ~ 750 different types of secrets), it then attempts to authenticate using that credential. TruffleHog provides users with extremely high confidence that any secret reported as “verified” is live because it’s been used to authenticate.

Most of the time we recommend using the git subcommand on git repos, but some repositories were corrupted, so we used a combination of the filesystem and git commands. (For a detailed discussion on when to use the Filesystem vs the Git command, please see this post.)

The following steps outline how to run TruffleHog against an exposed Git directory.

  1. Run TruffleHog’s filesystem (or git) command against the local Git directory. 

  1. If the scan returns exposed secrets, you’ll note all verified results are green and all unverified results are grey. A verified result means TruffleHog successfully authenticated to the target service using that credential. Importantly, an unverified result could still contain a live key, it just means that TruffleHog could not successfully authenticate against the relevant third-party service.

    Verified and Unverified AWS Keys in TruffleHog

  2. Re-run the above command with the --only-verified flag to see only “verified” secrets. 

Only Verified Keys in TruffleHog

Responsible Disclosure

After identifying a verified, exposed secret, our research team attempted to contact the impacted website owners. Truthfully, this was the most time-consuming part of our research. For most websites, we attempted the following 4 steps:

  1. Look for valid email addresses in git history. When you commit to git, your identity (including an email) attaches to the code changes. Unfortunately, as mentioned above, many of the sites served corrupted git repositories. This prevented us from reconstructing git history and easily identifying contacts at scale.

  2. Conduct a WHOIS lookup. Most organizations used private registration, so this wasn’t very helpful either.

  3. Guess role-based email addresses (ex: security@domain, info@domain). It’s not perfect, but most organizations have at least one role-based email address. We almost uniformly attempted security@ and info@, unless we identified a reason to try another (such as seguridad@ for a Spain-based website). 

  4. Rely on catch-all email configurations. Many email services implement a “catch-all” policy, where an email sent to a non-existent user gets redirected to a catch-all inbox. This is the least effective method, since this makes our message seem spammy. 

We attempted a minimum of 2 different email addresses for each website. Our notification emails looked like this:

Our Disclosure Email

Remediating an Exposed Git Directory

Given these website’s high traffic volume, we should assume web crawlers, and archivers (like, have already replicated and copied these keys. The only robust remediation solution is to invalidate, or rotate all exposed secrets. Click here for a more detailed post on key rotation.

Preventing Data Exposure in a Git Directory

  1. Avoid committing sensitive data such as passwords, private keys, and other secrets to your repository. Use environment variables or other secure means to store this information instead..

  2. Implement pre-commit hooks, using tools like TruffleHog, to prevent sensitive data from committing to git. 

  3. Remove the .git directory from production servers and verify that the .git directory is not deployed along with an application.

  4. Use .gitignore to exclude sensitive files (like config files) from being tracked by Git.

  5. Implement access controls on the web server to restrict access to the .git directory. For example, using Nginx, you could implement the following configuration:

    location ~ /\.git

  6. Regularly scan your repositories and servers for vulnerabilities, including the presence of a .git directory.


Our research team identified several thousand exposed .git directories on the Alexa Top 1 Million Websites. In addition to the risk that exposing source code presents for an organization, TruffleHog identified several hundred valid API keys and other secret information. Attackers can easily identify this information and use it for a variety of malicious purposes. We attempted to contact all organizations with exposed secrets; however, we could not reach everyone. Additionally, the Alexa Top 1 Million Websites list constantly changes, as does the website content hosted by these organizations. This means that recreating this research will lead to slightly different results; however, we’re confident that until all Git directories are removed from public viewing, secrets will continue to leak.

Our research was purposefully narrow in scope. We restricted our search for exposed git directories to the Alexa Top 1 Million Websites. There are millions and millions more websites to review. Also, it’s not uncommon for developers to expose a git directory outside of the web root directory (ex: We categorically excluded those types of git repositories from our research. Finally, we only reported verified live secrets, meaning we have extremely high confidence the secrets can be used by an attacker. There are many additional secret types that require users to verify them with an on-premise application/server. Out-of-the-box TruffleHog cannot verify these; however, we encourage users to author custom detectors for this purpose.

There’s a lot more research (and responsible disclosure) to be done to help organizations that inadvertently publicly expose a git directory and leak secrets.

The Dig

Thoughts, research findings, reports, and more from Truffle Security Co.