CVE Intelligence
Medium Info disclosure

CVE-2025-55750 — Gitpod Classic Affected by Bitbucket OAuth Token Exposure via Redirect Fragment

Gitpod is a developer platform for cloud development environments. In versions before main-gha.33628 for both Gitpod Classic and Gitpod Classic Enterprise, OAuth integration with Bitbucket in certain conditions allowed a crafted link to expose a valid Bitbucket access token via the URL fragment when clicked by an authenticated user. This resulted from how Bitbucket returned tokens and how Gitpod handled the redirect flow. The issue was limited to Bitbucket (GitHub and GitLab integrations were not affected), required user interaction, and has been mitigated through redirect handling and OAuth logic hardening. The issue was resolved in main-gha.33628 and later. There are no workarounds.

Published Aug 29, 2025 · Updated Oct 19, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+4
  • Technical severity (medium)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.33%
ahead of 25% of scored CVEs · Oct 19, 2026
Affects
Gitpod-io
Gitpod
CVSS base
6.5
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Gitpod-io Gitpod).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  5. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (info disclosure), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Gitpod-io Gitpod version Gitpod Classic < main-gha.33628version Gitpod Classic Enterprise < main-gha.33628 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.8 3.6 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-201 · Insertion of Sensitive Information Into Sent Data

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Look for anomalous data read/export volumes and access to sensitive records.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsauthentication logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · gitpod-io/gitpod
    Oct 19, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 19, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 19, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 6.5
    Oct 19, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 19, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 19, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • 2025
  • CVE published
    Aug 29, 2025 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× References added · Oct 19, 2026 – Oct 19, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 19, 2026 – Oct 19, 2026

References

3 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Gitpod-io
every CVE for this vendor
Info disclosure
same class
CWE-201
other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-55750 is "Gitpod Classic Affected by Bitbucket OAuth Token Exposure via Redirect Fragment", rated Medium. It affects Gitpod (Gitpod-io); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.33% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.