vulnerability / NVI-00018518 / Revision 1
go-git: Crafted repositories may modify main and submodule .git directories
GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for github.com/go-git/go-git/v5, github.com/go-git/go-git/v6, github.com/go-git/go-git. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.
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.
5.4 medium
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.
github.com/go-git/go-git/v5
source listed<= 5.19.0
### Impact A path validation issue in `go-git` could allow crafted repository data to affect files outside the intended checkout target, including the repository's `.git` directory. These validations were introduced in upstream Git years ago, so the vulnerability arose from go-git drifting from those checks. Some attack vectors were platform-specific: certain payloads affected only Windows users, others affected only macOS users, and some applied across all supported platforms. Using non-descendant `go-billy` filesystem instances, or different filesystem types, for the `Storer` and `Worktree` may provide some isolation against `.git` directory manipulation. For example, users that store the `.git` directory through `memfs` while using `osfs` for the worktree are not affected by this vulnerability in the main repository, because repository metadata is not materialized inside the worktree filesystem. However, this isolation does not necessarily apply when the repository contains submodules, since submodule dotgit directories may still be represented or materialized within the worktree context. It is important to note that exploitation requires a maliciously crafted repository pay
github.com/go-git/go-git/v6
source listed<= 6.0.0-alpha.3
### Impact A path validation issue in `go-git` could allow crafted repository data to affect files outside the intended checkout target, including the repository's `.git` directory. These validations were introduced in upstream Git years ago, so the vulnerability arose from go-git drifting from those checks. Some attack vectors were platform-specific: certain payloads affected only Windows users, others affected only macOS users, and some applied across all supported platforms. Using non-descendant `go-billy` filesystem instances, or different filesystem types, for the `Storer` and `Worktree` may provide some isolation against `.git` directory manipulation. For example, users that store the `.git` directory through `memfs` while using `osfs` for the worktree are not affected by this vulnerability in the main repository, because repository metadata is not materialized inside the worktree filesystem. However, this isolation does not necessarily apply when the repository contains submodules, since submodule dotgit directories may still be represented or materialized within the worktree context. It is important to note that exploitation requires a maliciously crafted repository pay
github.com/go-git/go-git
source listed<= 44.7.0
### Impact A path validation issue in `go-git` could allow crafted repository data to affect files outside the intended checkout target, including the repository's `.git` directory. These validations were introduced in upstream Git years ago, so the vulnerability arose from go-git drifting from those checks. Some attack vectors were platform-specific: certain payloads affected only Windows users, others affected only macOS users, and some applied across all supported platforms. Using non-descendant `go-billy` filesystem instances, or different filesystem types, for the `Storer` and `Worktree` may provide some isolation against `.git` directory manipulation. For example, users that store the `.git` directory through `memfs` while using `osfs` for the worktree are not affected by this vulnerability in the main repository, because repository metadata is not materialized inside the worktree filesystem. However, this isolation does not necessarily apply when the repository contains submodules, since submodule dotgit directories may still be represented or materialized within the worktree context. It is important to note that exploitation requires a maliciously crafted repository pay
03 / Response
What to do next
- 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.
05 / Provenance
Sources you can inspect
Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.
- GHSA-crhj-59gh-8x96 ↗
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.
- Revision 1 ·
First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.