CVE-2026-58438

highpriority · track · 0OT risk · elevatedEPSS 0.005 · 39 %ileDEEURUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.47% (39th) EPSS
CVSS 7.5 · high
Is it mine?
8 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · osv · cert_bund

EPSS · scored 2026-10-22

Cross-repository IDOR in issue-dependency removal lets an attacker tamper with and comment on private repos they cannot access

01

cvss

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

7.5
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 6.9–7.5

v3.17.5highAV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:Nsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:Nsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.17.5highCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:Nsecondaryexploitability 3.9 · impact 3.6
v3.16.9mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

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

Exploitation: poc · Automatable: yes · Technical Impact: partialcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (8)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

05

advisories (3)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • WID-SEC-W-2026-2304Gitea: Mehrere SchwachstellenDeutsch2026-07-13csaf · cert_bundDE

    Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Gitea ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, erweiterte Berechtigungen zu erlangen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren, sensible Informationen offenzulegen, Sitzungen zu übernehmen oder wiederzuverwenden oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand auszulösen.

  • GHSA-xv9x-fj9g-vj6hGitea: Cross-repository IDOR in issue-dependency removal lets an attacker tamper with and comment on private repos they cannot access2026-07-21ghsa · osvUS

    ### Details `RemoveDependency` in `routers/web/repo/issue_dependency.go` takes a `removeDependencyID` form parameter identifying the other issue by its global numeric ID, and fetches it with `issues_model.GetIssueByID(ctx, depID)` - no repository or permission check at all. It then calls `issues_model.RemoveIssueDependency(ctx, ctx.Doer, issue, dep, depType)` (`models/issues/dependency.go`), which deletes the dependency join row and then writes a comment referencing the removal, attributed to the calling user, onto the dependency record. The sibling function in the very same file, `AddDependency`, does this correctly when the two issues are in different repos (which `ALLOW_CROSS_REPOSITORY_DEPENDENCIES`, on by default, permits): ```go if issue.RepoID != dep.RepoID { if !setting.Service.AllowCrossRepositoryDependencies { ... } depRepoPerm, err := access_model.GetDoerRepoPermission(ctx, dep.Repo, ctx.Doer) if !depRepoPerm.CanReadIssuesOrPulls(dep.IsPull) { return // you can't see this dependency } } ``` `RemoveDependency` has no equivalent block at all - it goes straight from resolving `dep` by ID to deleting the link, regardless of which repo `dep` lives in or whether the caller can see it. I confirmed this same code is present in the current latest release, v1.26.4. ### PoC Prerequisites: an account with write access to issues on some repo `ownerA/repoA`, and the global numeric issue ID of an issue in a private repo `repoB` that is (or was) legitimately dependency-linked to one of the attacker's issues in `repoA` (cross-repo dependencies are commonly used between related public/private repos, and `ALLOW_CROSS_REPOSITORY_DEPENDENCIES` defaults to enabled). ```bash curl -s -b "gitea_session=$ATTACKER_SESSION_COOKIE" -X POST \ --data-urlencode "removeDependencyID=<repoB_issue_global_id>" \ --data-urlencode "dependencyType=blockedBy" \ "https://TARGET_HOST/ownerA/repoA/issues/N/dependency/delete" # Expected: the dependency link is deleted and a "removed dependency" comment # authored by the attacker is added to the repoB issue, even though the # attacker has no read access to repoB. ``` ### Impact This is a cross-repository IDOR / broken access control issue. An attacker can tamper with issue-tracking state (dependency relationships) and inject an attacker-authored comment into a private repository they cannot otherwise read or write to, crossing a trust boundary the "add" path explicitly enforces. Impact is bounded - it requires an existing dependency link and discloses no repository content - but it is a genuine unauthorized-write primitive across a private-repo boundary. ### Fix Add the same cross-repo permission check used in `AddDependency` (`access_model.GetDoerRepoPermission(ctx, dep.Repo, ctx.Doer).CanReadIssuesOrPulls(dep.IsPull)`) to `RemoveDependency` before allowing the deletion to proceed when `issue.RepoID != dep.RepoID`. **If possible, please apply for a CVE number when publishing. I would greatly appreciate it.**

  • GO-2026-6085Gitea: Cross-repository IDOR in issue-dependency removal lets an attacker tamper with and comment on private repos they cannot access in gitea.dev2026-07-27vendor · osvUS

    Gitea: Cross-repository IDOR in issue-dependency removal lets an attacker tamper with and comment on private repos they cannot access in gitea.dev

06

also known as (5)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2026-08-13modified 2026-09-25
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