GHSA-RGV6-XP99-6MGJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-21 20:20 – Updated: 2026-07-21 20:20
VLAI
Summary
Gitea Remember-Me Token Theft Not Invalidating Attacker Session
Details

The vulnerability is in the Remember-Me (gitea_incredible) token validation logic, specifically when handling a compromised token (hash mismatch).

The vulnerable function is this one:

https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/689ace1ce28fd74244b8aa335d9928cdbf6b22f9/services/auth/auth_token.go#L33-L64

Affected Endpoint

POST /user/login (and any endpoint triggering autoSignIn via the Remember-Me cookie).

Description

Gitea implements Remember-Me cookies using a split token design (ID:Hash), citing the Paragonie secure remember-me guide. When a token is used, its Hash is rotated, but the ID remains the same.

If an attacker steals a user's Remember-Me token and uses it to authenticate, the attacker is issued a new rotated token (same ID, new Hash). When the legitimate user later attempts to use their original token, Gitea correctly detects a hash mismatch for the given ID.

According to the referenced Paragonie specification, this indicates a compromised token, and ALL active remember-me sessions for that user MUST be invalidated. However, Gitea's CheckAuthToken function simply returns ErrAuthTokenInvalidHash. The calling code (autoSignIn) catches this error and deletes the victim's local cookie via ctx.DeleteSiteCookie, but fails to delete the compromised token from the database.

As a result, the attacker's active session is never invalidated, and the attacker maintains persistent, indefinite access to the victim's account, entirely defeating the purpose of the split-token security design.

Severity
9.1 (Critical)
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
Show details on source website
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "code.gitea.io/gitea"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.27.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-56750"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-613"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-07-21T20:20:21Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "The vulnerability is in the Remember-Me (gitea_incredible) token validation logic, specifically when handling a compromised token (hash mismatch).\n\nThe vulnerable function is this one:\n\nhttps://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/689ace1ce28fd74244b8aa335d9928cdbf6b22f9/services/auth/auth_token.go#L33-L64\n\n### Affected Endpoint\nPOST `/user/login` (and any endpoint triggering `autoSignIn` via the Remember-Me cookie).\n\n### Description\nGitea implements Remember-Me cookies using a split token design (ID:Hash), [citing the Paragonie secure remember-me guide](https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/689ace1ce28fd74244b8aa335d9928cdbf6b22f9/services/auth/auth_token.go#L21). When a token is used, its Hash is rotated, but the ID remains the same.\n\nIf an attacker steals a user\u0027s Remember-Me token and uses it to authenticate, the attacker is issued a new rotated token (same ID, new Hash). When the legitimate user later attempts to use their original token, Gitea correctly detects a hash mismatch for the given ID.\n\nAccording to the referenced Paragonie specification, this indicates a compromised token, and ALL active remember-me sessions for that user MUST be invalidated. However, Gitea\u0027s `CheckAuthToken` function simply returns `ErrAuthTokenInvalidHash`. The calling code (`autoSignIn`) catches this error and deletes the victim\u0027s local cookie via `ctx.DeleteSiteCookie`, but fails to delete the compromised token from the database.\n\nAs a result, the attacker\u0027s active session is never invalidated, and the attacker maintains persistent, indefinite access to the victim\u0027s account, entirely defeating the purpose of the split-token security design.",
  "id": "GHSA-rgv6-xp99-6mgj",
  "modified": "2026-07-21T20:20:21Z",
  "published": "2026-07-21T20:20:21Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/security/advisories/GHSA-rgv6-xp99-6mgj"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38406"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/38426"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/de4b8277e9cb576f2315fb03b5ab6478b42a1d31"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/commit/f69e15afe7496cc62e96dab244629c69eb31a7bf"
    },
    {
      "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:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Gitea Remember-Me Token Theft Not Invalidating Attacker Session"
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

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.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    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.