How severe is GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw?

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw has a CVSS score of 7.5/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw?

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw affects the following packages: gitpython (PyPI). Ecosystems affected: PyPI.

How do I fix GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw?

Update gitpython to 3.2.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw in my PyPI dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for gitpython, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Is GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw?

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.4%, placing it in the 36th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw?

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw is classified as CWE-1287 (CWE-1287). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw was published on October 27, 2026 and was last updated on October 27, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐍

🐍 PyPI

Not in CISA KEV

HIGH severity

GitPython command wrappers omit unsafe protocol and option checksGHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw

HIGHFix: gitpython-developers/GitPython#2251

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw is a high-severity (CVSS 7.5) CWE-1287 vulnerability in gitpython. A fix is available for gitpython — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Also known asCVE-2026-110857

Published

Oct 27, 2026

Updated

Oct 27, 2026

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Oct 27, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.
CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.4%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs36th percentile — riskier than 36% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, from FIRST.org EPSS.

How urgent is this, really

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). Outside the shaded patch-first corner.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 396,257 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Counts from FIRST.org, log-scaled.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected

🐍gitpython

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

GitPython has spent 2022-2026 rolling out two reusable guards method-by-method: Git.check_unsafe_protocols(url) (raises UnsafeProtocolError for <transport>:: remote-helper URLs - CVE-2022-24439) and Git.check_unsafe_options(...) (raises UnsafeOptionError for denylisted option spellings - CVE-2023-40267, CVE-2026-42215, CVE-2026-67323). Three wrapper methods that build a git argv from caller-controlled values still have neither:

Git.ls_remote (git/cmd.py:1128-1143) - checks options (:1139-1141) but forwards the URL positional unchecked; no allow_unsafe_protocols parameter exists. The same URL through clone_from raises UnsafeProtocolError.
Repo.merge_base (git/repo/base.py:895-936) - forwards **kwargs/*rev to self.git.merge_base with no guard; guarded sibling iter_commits sits 12 lines up. Its exception handler additionally swallows every non-128 GitCommandError into [], masking the injection.
IndexFile.move (git/index/base.py:1092-1168) - forwards **kwargs to git mv twice (:1147, :1167); guarded sibling remove() is 23 lines above.

Verified unfixed on main @ a54d159 (2026-09-21), post-dating latest release 3.1.62 (2026-09-07) - all three sites re-verified today.

Impact

Site 1 (ls_remote) - RCE conditional on the victim git transport policy. The common 'probe first, then clone' pattern (Git(...).ls_remote(attacker_url)) with an ext::sh -c ... URL executes arbitrary commands when the victim git permits the ext transport: dynamically verified with protocol.ext.allow=always (marker executed). git >= 2.38.1 stock config refuses the transport (fatal: transport 'ext' not allowed, rc 128) - GitPython adds no defense-in-depth and surfaces a bare GitCommandError. Environments on git < 2.38.1 are exposed with stock config - the exact population CVE-2022-24439 was scored against.

Sites 2/3 - latent argument-injection surface: caller kwargs flow 1:1 into the git argv before operands and -- (cmd.py:1850 opt_args + ext_args), and execute_kwargs (incl. shell=True/env - the CVE-2023-40267 Windows mechanism) passes through unguarded. Today git merge-base/git mv expose no exec option, so we claim the missing-guard class (vendor-settled by CVE-2026-67323, which bundled archive/ls_remote/iter_commits/blame in one advisory), not direct RCE.

Dynamic verification (today; GitPython main @ a54d159, git 2.55.0, Linux)

#	Call	Result
T1	`repo.git.ls_remote('ext::/tmp/gp_touch.sh')`, stock config	git refuses (rc 128); no `UnsafeProtocolError` from GitPython
T1b	same + victim config `protocol.ext.allow=always`	marker created - arbitrary command executed
T2	`repo.git.ls_remote('.', upload_pack=...)`	blocked by cmd.py:1141 (options-side fixed - protocol-side is the residual gap)
T3	`repo.merge_base('main','side', upload_pack=...)`	not blocked; argv `git merge-base --upload-pack=... main side`; rc 129 silently converted to `[]`
T4	`repo.index.move(['f1','f2'], output=...)`	not blocked; option reaches `git mv` (rc 129)

Coverage matrix (main @ a54d159)

check_unsafe_protocols: 7 call sites (_clone, archive, set_url, create, fetch, pull, push) - none on ls_remote. check_unsafe_options: 24 call sites incl. ls_remote, iter_commits, IndexFile.remove - absent on merge_base and move.

Precedents (same repo, same guard family)

CVE-2022-24439 / GHSA-hcpj-qp55-gfph (critical): check_unsafe_protocols on the clone path - Site 1 is the same ext:: primitive on a sibling API.
CVE-2023-40267 / GHSA-pr76-5cm5-w9cj (critical, 'incomplete fix for CVE-2022-24439'): check_unsafe_options - unguarded kwargs to argv treated as RCE (shell=True on Windows).
CVE-2026-42215 / GHSA-rpm5-65cw-6hj4 (high, fixed 3.1.47): underscored-spelling bypass - rollout still active in 2026.
CVE-2026-67323 / GHSA-956x-8gvw-wg5v (high, 8.4, fixed 3.1.51): added check_unsafe_options to archive/ls_remote/iter_commits/blame; its PoC is literally repo.git.ls_remote('.', upload_pack=...). Establishes that a wrapper missing the check is itself a vulnerability. This report is the residual gap of that rollout: ls_remote got options but not protocols; merge_base/move got neither.

Recommended fix (existing helpers, 1-3 lines per site)

Git.ls_remote: if not allow_unsafe_protocols: self.check_unsafe_protocols(args[0]) + new allow_unsafe_protocols: bool = False (the _clone pattern, base.py:1536-1538).
Repo.merge_base: check_unsafe_options(Git._option_candidates(list(rev), kwargs), unsafe_options=self.unsafe_git_revision_options) (the iter_commits pattern); stop masking non-128 statuses.
IndexFile.move: the remove() pattern with unsafe_git_pathspec_from_file_options.

One advisory, three affected methods, severity anchored on Site 1 - mirroring CVE-2026-67323's bundling.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐍PyPI	`gitpython`	all versions	3.2.0`pip install --upgrade 'gitpython==3.2.0'`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for gitpython, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update gitpython to 3.2.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary GitPython has spent 2022-2026 rolling out two reusable guards method-by-method: `Git.check_unsafe_protocols(url)` (raises `UnsafeProtocolError` for `<transport>::` remote-helper URLs - CVE-2022-24439) and `Git.check_unsafe_options(...)` (raises `UnsafeOptionError` for denylisted option spellings - CVE-2023-40267, CVE-2026-42215, CVE-2026-67323). Three wrapper methods that build a `git` argv from caller-controlled values still have **neither**: 1. **`Git.ls_remote`** (git/cmd.py:1128-1143) - checks options (:1139-1141) but forwards the URL positional unchecked; no `allow_unsafe_pr

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw in your dependencies?

Find it across PyPI, including transitive dependencies.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works

CVSS Score

7.5/10CVSS v3 base

Vector breakdown

Attack Vector

Network

Attack Complexity

High

Privileges Required

None

User Interaction

Required

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

High

Raw vector

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

CWE Classification

CWE-1287CWE-1287

Weaponization

No known public exploit tooling found.

OpenSSF Scorecard

Package health score

GitPython

7.5/10

Code-Review0/10

Maintained10/10

Branch-Protection3/10

Assessed Oct 26, 2026

Timeline

Disclosed

Oct 27, 2026

Identifiers

GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw

References

Webgithub.com Webgithub.com Webgithub.com Webgithub.com Packagegithub.com

Related vulnerabilities

Also affects gitpython

This CVE is high severity; 2 of 3 other CVEs affecting gitpython are rated as high or higher (top: high).

CVE-2026-87817GHSA-whh4-5q6c-9v3xCVE-2026-69097

Same weakness: CWE-1287

This CVE is high severity; 4 of 5 other CVEs with CWE-1287 are rated as high or higher (top: critical).

CVE-2026-114509CVE-2026-107723CVE-2026-61439CVE-2026-87012CVE-2026-50524Browse all CWE-1287

Provenance

Sources

OSV.devNVDFIRST.org (EPSS)

Last verifiedOct 27, 2026

GitPython command wrappers omit unsafe protocol and option checksGHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

EPSS Exploitation Probability

How urgent is this, really

Where this sits among everything scored

Real-World Exposure

Description

Summary

Impact

Dynamic verification (today; GitPython main @ a54d159, git 2.55.0, Linux)

Coverage matrix (main @ a54d159)

Precedents (same repo, same guard family)

Recommended fix (existing helpers, 1-3 lines per site)

Affected Packages

Detection & mitigation playbook

Detect

Fix

Workarounds

Frequently Asked Questions

Is GHSA-w8jc-g24h-crhw in your dependencies?