CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
highSSRFpublic exploit

CVE-2026-19650

CVE-2026-19650 — Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in GitLab

GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 18.2 before 18.11.11, 19.0 before 19.0.8, 19.1 before 19.1.6, and 19.2 before 19.2.4 that under certain conditions could have allowed an unauthenticated user to execute mutations via GET requests due to improper request validation in GraphQL multiplex query handling.

Published Updated Sources: NVD, GitLab (CNA), GitHub, GitHub Security Advisory, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

0%

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

GitLab

4 products listed

CVSS base

7.1

high

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade to versions 18.11.11, 19.0.8, 19.1.6, 19.2.4 or above.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

  • Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
  • Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
  • Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatus
GitLabGitLab18.2 to < 18.11.11Vulnerable
GitLabGitLab19.0 to < 19.0.8Vulnerable
GitLabGitLab19.1 to < 19.1.6Vulnerable
GitLabGitLab19.2 to < 19.2.4Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Availability

Low

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

None

User Interaction

Required

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
7.1CVSS 3.1high2.84.2gitlab.com (CNA), GitLab (CNA), GHSA

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-352 · Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

  • Gain Privileges or Assume Identity
  • Bypass Protection Mechanism
  • Read Application Data
  • Modify Application Data

Mitigation: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, use anti-CSRF packages such as the OWASP CSRFGuard. [REF-330] Another example is the ESAPI Session Management control, which includes a component for CSRF. [REF-45]

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-352

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

CAPEC-462 · Cross-Domain Search TimingCAPEC-467 · Cross Site IdentificationCAPEC-62 · Cross Site Request ForgeryCAPEC-111 · JSON Hijacking (aka JavaScript Hijacking)

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

5

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

  • Search application, proxy, and WAF logs for requests touching /EE.
  • Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable GitLab.
  • Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 5 public PoC repositories were reported.
web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPScloud metadata access logsegress proxy logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

  1. 2026
  2. Added · CVSS 3.1 7.1 (AV:N)

    Aug 17, 2026 · NVD

  3. Initial · CVE published

    Aug 17, 2026 · NVD

  4. Added · GHSA-78mw-f4q2-924q published (high)

    Aug 17, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.
Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-19650 is Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) in GitLab, a high vulnerability affecting GitLab from GitLab. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-19650. Public exploit evidence is: 5 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.