CVE-2026-44244

highpriority · track · 0EPSS 0.002 · 15 %ileDEEURUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.24% (15th) EPSS
CVSS 7.8 · high
Is it mine?
9 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
6 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · osv

EPSS · scored 2026-10-27

GitPython is a python library used to interact with Git repositories. Prior to version 3.1.49, GitConfigParser.set_value() passes values to Python's configparser without validating for newlines. GitPython's own _write() converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines (e.g. \n becomes \n\t), but Git still accepts an indented [core] stanza as a section header — so the injected core.hooksPath becomes effective configuration. Any Git operation that invokes hooks (commit, merge, checkout) will then execute scripts from the attacker-controlled path. This issue has been patched in version 3.1.49.

01

cvss

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

7.8
010

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

v3.17.8highAV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.17.8highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.17.8highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · security-advisories@github.comexploitability 1.8 · impact 5.9
v3.17.8highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · OSV
v3.17.1highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

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

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

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (9)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (3)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • WID-SEC-W-2026-2933Splunk SOAR: Mehrere SchwachstellenDeutsch2026-08-19csaf · cert_bundDE

    Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Splunk SOAR ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsvorkehrungen zu umgehen, um Informationen offenzulegen, um Dateien zu manipulieren, um einen SQL-Injection Angriff durchzuführen, um einen Cross-Site Scripting Angriff durchzuführen, und um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen.

  • GHSA-v87r-6q3f-2j67GitPython: Newline injection in config_writer().set_value() enables RCE via core.hooksPath2026-05-06ghsa · osvUS

    `GitConfigParser.set_value()` passes values to Python's `configparser` without validating for newlines. GitPython's own `_write()` converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines (e.g. `\n` becomes `\n\t`), but Git still accepts an indented `[core]` stanza as a section header — so the injected `core.hooksPath` becomes effective configuration. Any Git operation that invokes hooks (commit, merge, checkout) will then execute scripts from the attacker-controlled path. The vulnerability is not merely malformed config output: GitPython's own writer converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines, but Git still accepts an indented `[core]` stanza as a section header, so the injected `core.hooksPath` becomes effective configuration. This was found while auditing MLRun's `project.push()` method, which passes `author_name` and `author_email` directly to `config_writer().set_value()` with no sanitization. Both parameters cross a trust boundary — they are caller-supplied API inputs that end up in `.git/config`. PoC (standalone, no MLRun required): ```python import git, subprocess, os repo = git.Repo("/tmp/testrepo") with repo.config_writer() as cw: cw.set_value("user", "name", "foo\n[core]\nhooksPath=/tmp/hooks") r = subprocess.run(["git", "config", "core.hooksPath"], cwd="/tmp/testrepo", capture_output=True, text=True) assert r.returncode == 0 print(r.stdout.strip()) # /tmp/hooks os.makedirs("/tmp/hooks", exist_ok=True) open("/tmp/hooks/pre-commit", "w").write("#!/bin/sh\nid > /tmp/pwned\n") os.chmod("/tmp/hooks/pre-commit", 0o755) repo.index.add(["README"]) repo.git.commit(m="test") print(open("/tmp/pwned").read()) # uid=... ``` Tested on GitPython 3.1.46, git 2.39+. Impact: This is persistent repo config poisoning. Any user who can supply `author_name` or `author_email` to an application calling `config_writer().set_value()` can redirect Git hook execution to an arbitrary path. In a multi-user or hosted environment (e.g. a shared MLRun server where multiple users push to the same repositories), one user can poison the `.git/config` of a shared repo and have their hooks run in the context of every subsequent Git operation by any user. On single-user deployments, the impact depends on whether the application later invokes Git hooks automatically. Remediation: `set_value()` should raise on CR, LF, or NUL in values rather than silently pass them through: ```python import re if isinstance(value, (str, bytes)) and re.search(r"[\r\n\x00]", str(value)): raise ValueError("Git config values must not contain CR, LF, or NUL") ``` Rejecting is safer than stripping — a stripped newline might indicate the caller is passing unsanitized input at a higher level, and silent normalization masks that. Affected wherever `config_writer().set_value(section, key, user_input)` is called with external input.** GitPython is a dependency of DVC, MLflow, Kedro, and others — worth auditing their `set_value()` call sites for externally influenced inputs.

  • PYSEC-2026-21632026-05-07vendor · osvUS

    GitPython is a python library used to interact with Git repositories. Prior to version 3.1.49, GitConfigParser.set_value() passes values to Python's configparser without validating for newlines. GitPython's own _write() converts embedded newlines into indented continuation lines (e.g. \n becomes \n\t), but Git still accepts an indented [core] stanza as a section header — so the injected core.hooksPath becomes effective configuration. Any Git operation that invokes hooks (commit, merge, checkout) will then execute scripts from the attacker-controlled path. This issue has been patched in version 3.1.49.

06

also known as (7)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

08

references (6)

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