CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
criticalRemote Code Execpublic exploit

CVE-2026-78676

CVE-2026-78676 — GitPython before 3.1.59 Remote Code Execution via Config Injection

GitPython before 3.1.59 fails to safely re-serialize multi-line git-config values during write operations, corrupting dormant quoted values into injected directives like core.hooksPath. Attackers can craft config files with embedded newlines that become live git directives after any unrelated GitPython config write, enabling arbitrary code execution via hook invocation.

Published Updated Sources: NVD, gitpython-developers (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

gitpython-developers

2 products listed

CVSS base

9.8

critical · 2 sources

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade GitPython to a fixed release (3.1.59). Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

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
gitpython-developersGitPython0 to < 3.1.59Vulnerable
gitpython-developersGitPython3.1.59Patched

Attack characteristics

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

Availability

High

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Scope

Unchanged

Attack Complexity

Low

Attack Vector

Network

Privileges Req

None

User Interaction

None

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
9.8CVSS 3.1critical3.95.9NVD, gitpython-developers (CNA), GHSA
9.3CVSS 4.0criticalgitpython-developers (CNA)

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

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-88 · Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection')

  • Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
  • Alter Execution Logic
  • Read Application Data
  • Modify Application Data

Mitigation: Where possible, avoid building a single string that contains the command and its arguments. Some languages or frameworks have functions that support specifying independent arguments, e.g. as an array, which is used to automatically perform the appropriate quoting or escaping while building the command. For example, in PHP, escapeshellarg() can be used to escape a single argument to system(), or exec() can be called with an array of arguments. In C, code can often be refactored from using system() - which accepts a single string - to using exec(), which requires separate function arguments for each parameter.

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-88

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

CAPEC-41 · Using Meta-characters in E-mail Headers to Inject Malicious PayloadsCAPEC-137 · Parameter InjectionCAPEC-174 · Flash Parameter InjectionCAPEC-460 · HTTP Parameter Pollution (HPP)CAPEC-88 · OS Command Injection

Public exploit

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

Repositories

1

Detection

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

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for network-reachable GitPython.
  • Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 1 public PoC repositories were reported.
web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPSEDR 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.

  1. 2026
  2. Added · CVSS 3.1 9.8 (AV:N)

    Aug 25, 2026 · NVD

  3. Initial · CVE published

    Aug 25, 2026 · NVD

  4. Added · GHSA-9557-234j-7rv9 published (critical)

    Aug 25, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory

  5. CVE published by mitre

    Aug 25, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

4 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-2026-78676 is GitPython before 3.1.59 Remote Code Execution via Config Injection, a critical vulnerability affecting GitPython from gitpython-developers. 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-2026-78676. Public exploit evidence is: 1 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 9.8 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.