CVE-20XX-?

Gitea CVEs.

Published CVEs affecting Gitea, ranked by exploit odds.

48 CVEs · updated 2026-11-06 01:30 UTC

  1. CVE-2026-60004

    Gitea before 1.27.1 allows remote code execution via the diffpatch API through Git hook installation.

    Drop everything exploited Injection Web app Gitea

    9.8 CRITICAL 24% exploit odds Fix listed
  2. CVE-2026-94205

    Gitea Actions decided whether a fork pull request run needed approval based on the user who triggered the event rather than the pull request author. For `pull_request` activity triggered by a maintainer during ordinary triage, such as adding a label, the run was created without requiring approval, while the workflow definition was still taken from the fork head. Where Actions is enabled and a matching runner is registered, fork-controlled workflow code could run on the base repository's runners without an explicit approval.

    Other Gitea

    9.8 CRITICAL 0.6% exploit odds Fix listed
  3. CVE-2026-96404

    When Gitea's web installer is reachable against a database that already contains users, such as after `INSTALL_LOCK` has been reset to `false`, submitting the install form with an administrator username matching an existing account issued an authenticated session for that account without verifying its password. If the account is an administrator, the session grants full administrative access, including changing the account's password. Databases with a single user also did not require the reinstall confirmation.

    Auth & access Server Gitea

    8.1 HIGH 0.6% exploit odds Fix listed
  4. CVE-2026-73278

    Gitea's OAuth2 and OpenID Connect sign-in paths do not require a WebAuthn challenge when WebAuthn is the account's only configured second factor. A party able to authenticate through the affected external identity flow can obtain a full session without the passkey verification enforced during password login. One affected path can also persist an external identity link, extending the compromise beyond the initial session; accounts with TOTP configured are outside the reported WebAuthn-only scenario.

    Auth & access Gitea

    9.8 CRITICAL 0.5% exploit odds Fix listed
  5. CVE-2026-20897

    Gitea does not properly validate repository ownership when deleting Git LFS locks. A user with write access to one repository may be able to delete LFS locks belonging to other repositories.

    Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.5% exploit odds Fix listed
  6. CVE-2026-20912

    Gitea does not properly validate repository ownership when linking attachments to releases. An attachment uploaded to a private repository could potentially be linked to a release in a different public repository, making it accessible to unauthorized users.

    Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.5% exploit odds Fix listed
  7. CVE-2026-20736

    Gitea does not properly verify repository context when deleting attachments. A user who previously uploaded an attachment to a repository may be able to delete it after losing access to that repository by making the request through a different repository they can access.

    Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  8. CVE-2026-20750

    Gitea does not properly validate project ownership in organization project operations. A user with project write access in one organization may be able to modify projects belonging to a different organization.

    Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  9. CVE-2026-20800

    Gitea's notification API does not re-validate repository access permissions when returning notification details. After a user's access to a private repository is revoked, they may still view issue and pull request titles through previously received notifications.

    Gitea

    6.5 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  10. CVE-2026-104633

    When migrating a repository from another Gitea instance, Gitea used the page size reported in the source server's API settings to end its paginated downloads. A source that reported `max_response_items` as `0` made these loops run indefinitely and grow server memory until it was exhausted. Any user who can migrate repositories could point a migration at a server they control and cause a denial of service.

    Denial of service Server Gitea

    6.5 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  11. CVE-2026-103059

    When Gitea's built-in SSH server is enabled (`START_SSH_SERVER = true`), the presented public key was looked up with an SQL `LIKE` comparison of its encoded content, which is case-insensitive on some databases, including the default SQLite. An attacker who can construct a case variant of another user's registered RSA public key for which they can derive the private key could have that key matched to the victim's account and authenticate over SSH as that user. Keys are now looked up by fingerprint.

    Other Server Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  12. CVE-2026-104632

    Gitea Actions blocks the jobs of workflow runs from first-time fork pull request contributors until a maintainer approves the run. The rerun path only required a run to be finished and built the new attempt's jobs without considering the pending approval, so when a user with Actions write access cancelled a run that was awaiting approval and then re-ran it, the new jobs were created as waiting rather than blocked while the run still recorded that approval was required. Cancelling and re-running stale fork checks is a routine action that does not involve the approval control, so where Actions is enabled and a matching runner is registered, workflow code taken from the fork pull request head could run on the repository's runners without an explicit approval.

    Other Gitea

    8.8 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  13. CVE-2025-69413

    In Gitea before 1.25.2, /api/v1/user has different responses for failed authentication depending on whether a username exists.

    Gitea

    5.3 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  14. CVE-2025-68938

    Gitea before 1.25.2 mishandles authorization for deletion of releases.

    Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  15. CVE-2026-105267

    The Gitea web route for deleting tags (`POST /{owner}/{repo}/tags/delete`) requires only write access to the Code unit, but shares its handler with release deletion and did not check that the target was a plain tag. A collaborator with Code write access and without Releases write access could permanently delete published releases of that repository, including their attachments. Protected tag rules covering the release tag still blocked the deletion.

    Other Gitea

    8.1 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  16. CVE-2026-70357

    Gitea validates a repository migration hostname against its network allow and block lists before invoking Git, but the Git subprocess independently resolves the hostname when connecting. An attacker who can start a migration and control the destination's DNS can change the address between validation and connection to reach a blocked internal address. The affected path is the Git clone operation; validation in the migration HTTP client's dialer does not protect the independently connecting Git subprocess.

    Disclosure Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  17. CVE-2026-20883

    Gitea's stopwatch API does not re-validate repository access permissions. After a user's access to a private repository is revoked, they may still view issue titles and repository names through previously started stopwatches.

    Gitea

    6.5 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  18. CVE-2025-68943

    Gitea before 1.21.8 inadvertently discloses users' login times by allowing (for example) the lastlogintime explore/users sort order.

    Gitea

    5.3 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  19. CVE-2025-68945

    In Gitea before 1.21.2, an anonymous user can visit a private user's project.

    Gitea

    5.8 MEDIUM 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  20. CVE-2026-101023

    Gitea's OAuth2 token endpoint verified the signature and grant of a token submitted with the `refresh_token` grant type, but not that the token was a refresh token. An unexpired access token for the same OAuth2 application and grant could be exchanged for a new access token and refresh token. Whoever holds such an access token could keep access beyond the token's original lifetime.

    Auth & access Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  21. CVE-2026-96399

    A repository's external issue tracker regular expression containing alternating capture groups could produce invalid slice indexes when Gitea rendered issue references, causing a runtime panic that terminated the Gitea process. A user who can edit a repository's external issue tracker settings could make any later rendering of matching content, such as viewing a README, crash the instance for all users.

    Memory safety Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  22. CVE-2026-96580

    Gitea expanded a workflow's static `strategy.matrix` into its full Cartesian product without a size limit when creating a run, before the fork pull request approval gate applied. A user who can open a pull request from a fork could submit a small workflow file whose matrix expands to a very large number of jobs, consuming server memory and potentially terminating the Gitea process. No runner is required. Static matrices above 256 combinations are now rejected before expansion.

    Denial of service Server Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.4% exploit odds Fix listed
  23. CVE-2026-104626

    A user who can open a fork pull request can place workflow content with a shared run-level concurrency group into a Gitea Actions run that is awaiting approval. When a later run in that group cancels the blocked job, the run becomes terminal while still marked as needing approval. If a maintainer later approves the run, Gitea passed the already-cancelled job back through concurrency preparation, set it to waiting, and made it claimable by a matching runner, executing fork-controlled workflow code. Exploitation requires the maintainer's later approval action, Actions to be enabled, and a runner that accepts the repository's jobs.

    Other Gitea

    8.8 HIGH 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  24. CVE-2026-95106

    Gitea accepted pushed Git trees containing two entries with the same name, which Git's own consistency checks reject. Gitea's web views resolved such a path to the first entry, while `git checkout`, Gitea Actions, and release archives use the last. A contributor could open a pull request whose diff and file views show benign content while CI and checkouts at the same commit use different, attacker-controlled content. Incoming objects are now checked for consistency; objects already stored in existing repositories are not rescanned.

    Other Gitea

    9.1 CRITICAL 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  25. CVE-2025-68939

    Gitea before 1.23.0 allows attackers to add attachments with forbidden file extensions by editing an attachment name via an attachment API.

    Gitea

    8.2 HIGH 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  26. CVE-2026-20888

    Gitea does not properly verify authorization when canceling scheduled auto-merges via the web interface. A user with read access to pull requests may be able to cancel auto-merges scheduled by other users.

    Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  27. CVE-2026-95112

    When processing issue and comment bodies, Gitea scanned the entire preceding text for action keywords such as "closes" or "fixes" once per Markdown link, giving processing time quadratic in the input size. An authenticated user able to submit issue or comment content could send a crafted body of about 1 MB that keeps a CPU core busy for several minutes while holding a database transaction open.

    Other Server Gitea

    6.5 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  28. CVE-2026-20904

    Gitea does not properly validate ownership when toggling OpenID URI visibility. An authenticated user may be able to change the visibility settings of other users' OpenID identities.

    Gitea

    6.5 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  29. CVE-2025-68944

    Gitea before 1.22.2 sometimes mishandles the propagation of token scope for access control within one of its own package registries.

    Gitea

    5.0 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  30. CVE-2025-68940

    In Gitea before 1.22.5, branch deletion permissions are not adequately enforced after merging a pull request.

    Gitea

    3.1 LOW 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  31. CVE-2026-89430

    Gitea validated a push mirror's remote address against the `[migrations]` allow and block lists only when the mirror was created. Each synchronization passed the stored address directly to `git push`, so a name that later resolved to a blocked or internal address was still reached. A user with administrator access to a repository, which includes repositories they create themselves, could aim push mirror synchronization at internal Git services and force-push the repository's contents to them.

    Other Gitea

    8.1 HIGH 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  32. CVE-2026-0798

    Gitea may send release notification emails for private repositories to users whose access has been revoked. When a repository is changed from public to private, users who previously watched the repository may continue to receive release notifications, potentially disclosing release titles, tags, and content.

    Gitea

    3.5 LOW 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  33. CVE-2026-97208

    The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

    Auth & access Gitea

    4.9 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  34. CVE-2025-68941

    Gitea before 1.22.3 mishandles access to a private resource upon receiving an API token with scope limited to public resources.

    Gitea

    4.9 MEDIUM 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  35. CVE-2026-104636

    Gitea validated the initial remote URL for push mirrors, wiki remote checks, and fetches of migrated pull request heads, but the subsequent raw Git operations followed HTTP redirects without revalidating the destination. A repository administrator using a policy-allowed endpoint that redirects could make Gitea's Git client send requests to an address that the outbound host policy would otherwise block. The impact depends on the configured policy and the internal services reachable from the server.

    Disclosure Server Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed
  36. CVE-2025-68942

    Gitea before 1.22.2 allows XSS because the search input box (for creating tags and branches) is v-html instead of v-text.

    Gitea

    5.4 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  37. CVE-2025-68946

    In Gitea before 1.20.1, a forbidden URL scheme such as javascript: can be used for a link, aka XSS.

    Gitea

    5.4 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  38. CVE-2026-96589

    When a private repository is transferred to a user who lacks access, Gitea grants that recipient temporary read access as a collaborator so they can review the repository. Rejecting or cancelling the transfer did not revoke this collaboration, so the named recipient kept persistent read access to the private repository, including its code, issues, pull requests and wiki, and could clone it. The repository owner was not notified. Transfer-granted access is now removed while collaborations that existed before the transfer are preserved.

    Other Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  39. CVE-2026-101027

    When `[migrations] ALLOWED_DOMAINS` was configured, a hostname matching the allow list was accepted without checking its resolved address against the local-network restrictions. A user who can start repository migrations and control the DNS of an allowed hostname could make it resolve to loopback or private addresses and bypass `ALLOW_LOCALNETWORKS = false`, reaching internal services from the Gitea server. Instances without `ALLOWED_DOMAINS` configured are not affected by this specific bypass.

    Other Server Gitea

    7.7 HIGH 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  40. CVE-2026-96594

    The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

    XSS Browser & mail Gitea

    6.1 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  41. CVE-2026-103670

    When a Gitea Actions run was inserted, older runs in the same workflow-level concurrency group were cancelled without checking whether the new run still needed approval. Because fork pull request runs are inserted under the base repository, a user who can open a pull request from a fork could cancel trusted in-progress runs that share a concurrency group with `cancel-in-progress` enabled, without approval and without running any code. On self-hosted runners this can interrupt deployments and leave partial state behind.

    Other Gitea

    7.5 HIGH 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  42. CVE-2026-79960

    When a push was authenticated with a deploy key, Gitea recorded the repository owner as the pusher, so permission checks in the push hook pipeline evaluated the owner instead of the deploy key. A holder of a writable deploy key could create protected tags without being on the tag allow list and change repository visibility through push options, for example making a private repository public. Pull requests created through the AGit flow with a deploy key were also attributed to the owner.

    Auth & access Gitea

    7.1 HIGH 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  43. CVE-2026-96400

    With `[migrations] ALLOWED_DOMAINS` set to a matching entry such as `*` or a hostname wildcard, Gitea's migration URL validation could permit reserved and link-local addresses, such as `169.254.169.254`, even when `ALLOW_LOCALNETWORKS = false`. The local-network block list did not cover these ranges, and a hostname matching the allow list was accepted regardless of its resolved address. A user who can start migrations on such an instance could reach these addresses from the Gitea server; the default empty `ALLOWED_DOMAINS` configuration is not affected.

    Disclosure Server Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  44. CVE-2026-105268

    The Gitea API routes for issue attachments (`/api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/assets/{attachment_id}`) also accepted attachments that belong to comments on the issue. Because the author of an issue may edit and delete the issue's attachments, a user who opened an issue could rename or delete attachments that other users had posted in comments on that issue. The contents of the attachments could not be changed.

    Auth & access Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  45. CVE-2026-89182

    With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

    Auth & access Gitea

    5.4 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  46. CVE-2026-103667

    Gitea's container registry served blob downloads with a `Content-Type` taken from the media type declared in pushed image manifests, without a `Content-Disposition` or restrictive content security policy. A user who can push container images can publish a blob containing HTML and JavaScript with a `text/html` media type. When a victim who is authenticated to the instance opens the blob URL in a browser, the script runs on the Gitea origin and can perform actions as the victim, such as creating API tokens.

    XSS Browser & mail Gitea

    5.4 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  47. CVE-2026-101029

    Gitea's repository migration and pull mirror egress checks could be bypassed with a hostname that returns multiple DNS answers, because the address that was validated was not necessarily the address Git later connected to. A low-privileged user who can create migrations or mirrors could direct the server to internal services, reading from and writing to reachable internal Git or HTTP endpoints. Content from internal responses could additionally be disclosed through migration and mirror error messages.

    Disclosure Server Gitea

    4.3 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed
  48. CVE-2026-86684

    The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

    Auth & access Server Gitea

    7.1 HIGH 0.1% exploit odds Fix listed

All CVEs affecting Gitea that appear in CVE.org and NVD, sorted by how likely they are to be exploited (EPSS), with fix status and timeline.