Skip to content

Repository content can impersonate the git directory, leading to arbitrary code execution

High
Byron published GHSA-239g-whfq-7xj9 Aug 26, 2026

Package

pip GitPython (pip)

Affected versions

<=3.1.59

Patched versions

>=3.1.60

Description

Summary

Repo.__init__ decides which directory is the git directory by testing candidate paths in an order that
considers the real .git last. Two earlier tests can be satisfied by ordinary tracked files. Git
reserves only the literal name .git, so HEAD, objects/, refs/, config, gitdir, commondir
and hooks/ at a repository root are all legal tracked content.

Consequently, after a victim opens or clones an attacker's repository, GitPython resolves git_dir to
the working-tree root while real git correctly resolves <root>/.git. Everything GitPython then
treats as "inside the git directory" is attacker-authored content — including hooks/, which it
executes.

Affected code (3.1.59)

The discovery loop in git/repo/base.py tests, in order:

  1. git/repo/base.py:299isfile(curpath/gitdir) and isfile(curpath/commondir) and isfile(curpath/HEAD)
  2. git/repo/base.py:320is_git_dir(curpath)
  3. git/repo/base.py:341dotgit = osp.join(curpath, ".git") ← the real git dir, considered last

is_git_dir (git/repo/fun.py:60) requires only that objects/ and refs/ are directories and that
HEAD is a file; HEAD's contents are never parsed. The hook path is resolved from
index.repo.git_dir (git/index/fun.py:73), i.e. the mis-resolved directory.

Proof of concept

Requires only pip install GitPython==3.1.59. Full script attached as poc1_rce.py; it runs entirely
in a temp directory and the payload only writes a marker file.

Attacker repository — four ordinary tracked files at the root:

path mode content
gitdir 100644 .git\n
commondir 100644 .git\n
HEAD 100644 ref: refs/heads/master\n
hooks/pre-commit 100755 #!/bin/sh + payload

Victim — two ordinary calls:

repo = git.Repo.clone_from(url, dst)     # or git.Repo(dst)
repo.index.commit("automated commit")    # code execution happens here

Observed on the PyPI release 3.1.59 (Linux and Windows):

real git says the git dir is : /tmp/.../victim/.git
GitPython says it is         : /tmp/.../victim      <- shadowed
attacker's hook executed     : True
git fsck                     : (clean)

The pre-commit hook runs at git/index/base.py:1201, before write_tree(), so it fires even though
the commit later fails.

Impact

A service that opens or clones an untrusted repository with GitPython — a CI runner building a fork
pull request, a code-scanning/SBOM service, a mirror, a dependency bot, an AI code-review/agent tool —
can be made to:

  1. Execute arbitrary commands via the tracked <root>/hooks/pre-commit when the victim calls
    index.commit().
  2. Read files outside the repository: the tracked <root>/config becomes the repository config and
    is parsed with merge_includes=True (git/repo/base.py:765), so [include] path = ~/.aws/credentials
    discloses the file. (Repo._config_reader still defaults merge_includes=True, so the hardening
    added in 3.1.59 for .gitmodules/GHSA-7833 does not cover this path.)
  3. Write a config file to an attacker-chosen directory via an absolute tracked commondir.

Delivery is silent: git clone exits 0, git fsck (including --strict, and with
transfer.fsckObjects/fetch.fsckObjects=true) reports nothing, and the clone passes every read-only
probe (head.commit, branches, is_dirty(), untracked_files, iter_commits) because a tracked
commondir of .git pins common_dir to the real .git.

Threat model / preconditions

  • Attacker controls the content of a repository the victim opens or clones with GitPython (public repo,
    fork PR, mirrored dependency).
  • For code execution, the victim performs a commit via GitPython's native index.commit(). For the
    file-read impact, opening the repo and reading config is enough.
  • GIT_WORK_TREE is not a mitigation — git_dir is assigned and the discovery loop breaks before
    the environment is consulted.
  • Real git is unaffected; only GitPython mis-resolves the directory.

Remediation

  1. Test curpath/.git before the gitdir/commondir/HEAD triple and before is_git_dir(curpath).
  2. Resolve hook_path / _commit_hook_path / _get_validated_reflog_path through repo.common_dir.
  3. Containment-check commondir/gitdir contents before joining (reuse
    SymbolicReference._get_validated_path).
  4. Validate HEAD in is_git_dir (require ref: refs/... or a 40-hex sha).
  5. Pass merge_includes=False in Repo._config_reader (git/repo/base.py:765).

Note for the maintainers

Commit 406b98e1 (2026-05-31, "respect core.hooksPath for commit hooks") resolved the hook path via
git rev-parse --git-path, which is immune because git rediscovers the true .git. Commit 9bc287a2
(2026-07-20) reverted it to avoid an unconditional rev-parse dependency — reintroducing the exec step.
Measured at each commit with the healthy-looking layout: 406b98e1 → hook did not fire; 9bc287a2
3.1.59 → hook fired.

Scope note

Only the repository-root case is reported: where a real .git exists, git prefers it, and GitPython
does not. A fake git dir in a subdirectory fools real git too, so that variant is out of scope as a
general ecosystem hazard rather than a GitPython defect.

###POC Files :
poc1_rce.py
poc2_file_read.py

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

CVE ID

No known CVE

Weaknesses

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Learn more on MITRE.

Uncontrolled Search Path Element

The product uses a fixed or controlled search path to find resources, but one or more locations in that path can be under the control of unintended actors. Learn more on MITRE.

Credits