By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00008990 / Revision 1

GitPython Remote.pull() refspec bypasses the --upload-pack unsafe-option guard, enabling arbitrary command execution

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for GitPython. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-f9j4-qggq-h239

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

CVSS

8.1 high

GitHub source severity; exploitability and local consequence require separate evidence.

As of · GitHub Advisory Database

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

GitPython

source listed
  • >= 3.1.30, < 3.2.0

## Summary `Remote.pull()` in GitPython forwards its positional `refspec` argument directly to the `git pull` child process while its unsafe-option guard inspects only keyword arguments. An application that passes attacker-influenced data as the `refspec` (for example a user-supplied branch or refspec parameter in a web or CI service) can supply an option-shaped value such as `--upload-pack=`. The value bypasses the `unsafe_git_pull_options` check, is placed after the `--` separator on the `git pull` command line, and is executed as the upload-pack program for local-path or SSH transports. This yields arbitrary command execution with the privileges of the calling process using the documented default arguments (`allow_unsafe_options=False`). ## Root Cause `Remote.pull()` is documented to reject dangerous options unless `allow_unsafe_options=True`, and `--upload-pack` is explicitly listed as such an option. The guard, however, only screens keyword arguments and never the positional `refspec`. The check builds its candidate list with `Git._option_candidates([], kwargs)`, passing an empty list in place of the positionals, so the `refspec` value is never compared against `un

GitHub Advisory Database

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-f9j4-qggq-h239 ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗