BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-96594High confidence

Gitea repository media API stored XSS

Gitea · Gitea

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-94RX-FQM6-Q23V ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

6.1MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Scheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • EPSS is 0.17% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Gitea Gitea and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: As exposure requiresRemediation target: Within 365 days

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-96594 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitycode.gitea.io/gitea: Gitea: Cross-site scripting via repository media API endpoint
1 known not affected

The vendor explicitly states that these products are not affected by this CVE.

  • All currently supported Red Hat products
Summary
A flaw was found in Gitea. The repository media application programming interface (API) endpoint does not return appropriate content-type and disposition security headers when serving small files directly from a repository. An authenticated attacker with repository push access can commit a malicious HTML file that renders directly in a user's browser, leading to cross-site scripting (XSS). This flaw allows the attacker to execute arbitrary scripts in the victim's active session and perform unauthorized actions on their behalf.
Remediation
No remediation text is recorded.
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-94066

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
6.1 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionScheduled

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.

Patch available
01

What, why and how

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

What

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

Why

Attacker-controlled content can reach a browser as executable script without sufficient output encoding or sanitisation.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

Why

Attacker-controlled content can reach a browser as executable script without sufficient output encoding or sanitisation.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication after a user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
Required interaction required
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Changed: exploitation can affect a different security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-79 ↗

CWE-79: Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting'). The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controllable input before it is placed in output that is used as a web page that is served to other users.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UIRequiredUser interaction: Another user must perform an action for exploitation to succeed.SChangedScope: The attack can affect a component governed by a different security authority.CLowConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ILowIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-79
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-94066Official EUVD mapping

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-3792Gitea: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Gitea ausnutzen, um beliebigen Programmcode auszuführen, erweiterte Berechtigungen zu erlangen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren oder offenzulegen sowie Cross-Site-Scripting-Angriffe durchzuführen.

Official advisory ↗
CSIRT Italia · Italian · aggiornamenti-di-sicurezza-per-giteaAggiornamenti di sicurezza per Gitea

Aggiornamenti di sicurezza sanano 9 vulnerabilità, di cui 3 con gravità “alta”, che interessano Gitea, piattaforma collaborativa open source per la gestione del codice sorgente e lo sviluppo di applicazioni software.

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Patch available
Affected
Gitea: ≤ 28.0.0
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 6 Oct 2026 · Last source change 7 Oct 2026, 15:04 UTC · CWE-79 · Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting')

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCISA ADP
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-10-07
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-94066
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. SeveritySeverity changed from Unknown to Medium.
    Before
    Unknown
    After
    Medium
    CISA ADP ↗
  2. CVSS scoreCVSS score changed from not recorded to 6.1 (CVSS 3.1 · CISA ADP · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N).
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    6.1 (CVSS 3.1 · CISA ADP · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N)
    CISA ADP ↗
  3. ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-94066 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.
    Before
    not recorded
    After
    {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-94066"}
    ENISA EUVD ↗
  4. Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-94066↗Vendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security↗CVE authority or vendor reference · GitHub GHSA-94RX-FQM6-Q23V↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-96594 · cve.blacktree.nl