CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
CISA KEVcriticalPath Traversalpublic exploit

CVE-2026-85706

CVE-2026-85706 — Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') in GitLab

GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 18.7 before 19.1.8, 19.2 before 19.2.6, and 19.3 before 19.3.2 that, under certain conditions, an unauthenticated user could have read arbitrary files from the GitLab server due to improper path confinement and missing authentication enforcement in the repository commits API.

Published Updated Sources: NVD, GitLab (CNA), CISA, 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

Confirmed

CISA KEV, listed Sep 11, 2026

EPSS

0%

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

GitLab

3 products listed

CVSS base

10

critical

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

Active

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

Yes

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Total

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade to versions 19.1.8, 19.2.6, 19.3.2 or above.

CISA required action

Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines.

Federal deadline Sep 14, 2026 — in 2 days

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.
  • Treat as emergency remediation because CISA KEV status is present.
  • 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
GitLabGitLab18.7 to < 19.1.8Vulnerable
GitLabGitLab19.2 to < 19.2.6Vulnerable
GitLabGitLab19.3 to < 19.3.2Vulnerable

Attack characteristics

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

Availability

None

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Scope

Changed

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
10CVSS 3.1critical3.95.8gitlab.com (CNA), GitLab (CNA), GHSA

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

  • Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
  • Modify Files or Directories
  • Read Files or Directories
  • DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart

Mitigation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an accept known good input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, boat may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as red or blue. Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single . character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as / to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering / is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if ../ sequences are removed from the .../...// string in a sequential fashion, two instances of ../ would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the ../ string.

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-22Path Traversal

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

CAPEC-126 · Path TraversalCAPEC-76 · Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-79 · Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-64 · Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-78 · Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding

CISA KEV details

CISA lists a CVE here once it has evidence of exploitation against real targets.

Listed

Sep 11, 2026

Federal deadline

Sep 14, 2026

in 2 days

Ransomware use

Unknown

CISA records ransomware use only for campaigns it has confirmed, so “Unknown” means unrecorded, not ruled out. The deadline binds US federal agencies; for everyone else it is a date to argue against.

Public exploit

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

Repositories

11

2 of the 5 sampled are weaponized

Social mentions

Posts naming this CVE. Attention, not evidence of exploitation — it spikes on disclosure and decays whether or not anything is exploited.

SOCRadar32 more posts on this CVEShowing 5 of 37 · Who is discussing this CVE, and how loudlyUnlock free

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 11 public PoC repositories were reported.
web/proxy/WAF logsapplication logsnetwork IDS/IPS

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 10.0 (AV:N)

    Sep 12, 2026 · NVD

  3. Initial · CVE published

    Sep 12, 2026 · NVD

  4. Added · GHSA-f47w-mrg9-g9p2 published (critical)

    Sep 12, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory

  5. CVE published by MITRE.

    Sep 12, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

  6. Added to CISA KEV catalog

    Sep 11, 2026 · CISA

Source activity

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

  • SvrsSep 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
  • Tweets · 3 times tweeted.Sep 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
  • CVE appeared in the Cve Trends.Sep 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI
  • Github_Repos · Github repository created, FlowerWitch/CVE-2026-85706_docker_expSep 11, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

7 on the record

Coverage

7 stories from the feeds we poll

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-2026-85706 is Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') in GitLab, a critical vulnerability affecting GitLab from GitLab. The current evidence lists it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Yes: CISA KEV signal present. Public exploit evidence is: 11 public PoC repositories reported; 2 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 10 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.