CVE Intelligence
High Injection

CVE-2025-68144 — mcp-server-git argument injection in git_diff and git_checkout functions allows overwriting local files

In mcp-server-git versions prior to 2025.12.17, the git_diff and git_checkout functions passed user-controlled arguments directly to git CLI commands without sanitization. Flag-like values (e.g., `--output=/path/to/file` for `git_diff`) would be interpreted as command-line options rather than git refs, enabling arbitrary file overwrites. The fix adds validation that rejects arguments starting with - and verifies the argument resolves to a valid git ref via rev_parse before execution. Users are advised to update to 2025.12.17 resolve this issue when it is released.

Published Dec 17, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 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 7.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+14
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+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
7.21%
ahead of 94% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Lfprojects
Model Context Protocol Servers and 1 more
CVSS base
7.1
High · 3 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
Yes
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 (Lfprojects Model Context Protocol Servers, Modelcontextprotocol Servers).
  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. EPSS ahead of 94% of scored CVEs: prioritize it in the patch queue.
  6. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (injection), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Lfprojects Model Context Protocol Servers < 2025.12.17 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Modelcontextprotocol Servers version < 2025.12.17 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
None
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
6.3 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.3 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
7.1 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 4.2 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-88 · Argument Injection

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 7.21%

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 parameters with command/query metacharacters and unexpected child processes of the service.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSapplication logsendpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · modelcontextprotocol/servers
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.1
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • 2025
  • CVE published
    Dec 17, 2025 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

1 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Lfprojects
every CVE for this vendor
Injection
same class
CWE-88
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Medium CVE-2026-27735 mcp-server-git : Path traversal in git_add allows staging files outside repository boundaries Feb 25, 2026
  • High CVE-2025-68143 mcp-server-git's unrestricted git_init tool allows repository creation at arbitrary filesystem locations Dec 17, 2025
  • Critical CVE-2025-68145 mcp-server-git has missing path validation when using --repository flag Dec 17, 2025

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-2025-68144 is "mcp-server-git argument injection in git_diff and git_checkout functions allows overwriting local files", rated High. It affects Model Context Protocol Servers (Lfprojects); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 7.21% 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.