Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-58440. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-58440 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-58440. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with EDR process telemetry, host service logs where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-58440 using CVSS null, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

Workarounds are not confirmed from current sources. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

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. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

Remote Code Exec

CVE-2026-58440

CVE-2026-58440 — Webhooks created by a collaborator keep firing after their repo access is revoked → ongoing real-time exfiltration of private repo content (incomplete revocation cleanup in `DeleteCollaboration`)

Q: What is CVE-2026-58440?

CVE-2026-58440 is Webhooks created by a collaborator keep firing after their repo access is revoked → ongoing real-time exfiltration of private repo content (incomplete revocation cleanup in `DeleteCollaboration`). The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Remote Code Exec mapped to CWE-284 CWE-284; CWE-863 CWE-863.

Webhooks created by a collaborator keep firing after their repo access is revoked → ongoing real-time exfiltration of private repo content (incomplete revocation cleanup in `DeleteCollaboration`)

Published Aug 13, 2026Updated Aug 13, 2026Sources: NVD, Gitea (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

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

Gitea

2 products listed

CVSS base

Unscored

no source published a base score

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade gitea.dev to 1.27.0 or later (go advisory GHSA-66m4-5jjr-2rg5).

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.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
Gitea	Gitea Open Source Git Server	0 to <= 1.26.4	Vulnerable
go	gitea.dev	< 1.27.0	Vulnerable

Every base score collected

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

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Source
6.8	CVSS 3.1	medium	—	—	GHSA

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

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-284 · Improper Access Control

Varies by Context::

Mitigation: Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-284
CWE-863

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

CAPEC-562 · Modify Shared FileCAPEC-19 · Embedding Scripts within ScriptsCAPEC-503 · WebView ExposureCAPEC-441 · Malicious Logic InsertionCAPEC-563 · Add Malicious File to Shared WebrootCAPEC-478 · Modification of Windows Service ConfigurationCAPEC-479 · Malicious Root CertificateCAPEC-502 · Intent SpoofCAPEC-536 · Data Injected During ConfigurationCAPEC-546 · Probe Application MemoryCAPEC-550 · Install New ServiceCAPEC-551 · Modify Existing Service

T1027.009Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded Payloads
T1546.004Event Triggered Execution: .bash_profile and .bashrc
T1546.016Event Triggered Execution: Installer Packages

Detection

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

EDR process telemetryhost service logs

Timeline

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

2026
Initial · CVE published
Aug 13, 2026 · NVD
Added · GHSA-66m4-5jjr-2rg5 published (medium)
Jul 21, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory

Source activity

Readings a source repeats on a schedule, counted rather than listed.

1×CVE modified by NIST, Modified, LinkAug 13, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

8 on the record

blog.gitea.com/gitea-1.27.0-is-released/
Vendor Advisory
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.27.0
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, NIST, Mitre
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/security/advisories/GHSA-66m4-5jjr-2rg5
Exploit, Third Party Advisory, NIST, Mitre
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38406
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38426
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/de4b8277e9cb576f2315fb03b5ab6478b42a1d31
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/f69e15afe7496cc62e96dab244629c69eb31a7bf
Exploit, Third Party Advisory
github.com/advisories/GHSA-66m4-5jjr-2rg5
Exploit, Third Party Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

Giteaevery CVE for this vendor
goevery CVE for this vendor
Remote Code Execsame class
CWE-284other pages naming this weakness

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-2026-58440 is Webhooks created by a collaborator keep firing after their repo access is revoked → ongoing real-time exfiltration of private repo content (incomplete revocation cleanup in `DeleteCollaboration`), a unscored vulnerability affecting Gitea Open Source Git Server, gitea.dev from Gitea, go. 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-2026-58440. Public exploit evidence is: A public PoC is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-58440. 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 null 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.