CVE Intelligence
High File handling exploit reference

CVE-2026-110767 — Gitingest through 0.3.1 Arbitrary File Read via Symlink in Blob Ingestion

Gitingest through 0.3.1 contains a symlink following vulnerability in ingest_query single-file blob ingestion that allows unauthenticated attackers to read server files by submitting symlink blob URLs. Attackers can commit a symlink to a public repository and submit its blob URL, causing the server to return any file the service user can read, up to 10 MB.

Published Oct 14, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, GitHub Security Advisories · CNA: VulnCheck

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 0.4% (30-day exploitation probability)+5
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5
  • 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
0.41%
ahead of 33% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Coderamp-labs
Gitingest
CVSS base
7.5
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
Proof of concept
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 (Coderamp-labs Gitingest).
  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. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (file handling), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Coderamp-labs Gitingest ≤ 0.3.1 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
None
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
8.7 CVSS 4.0 High — — disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.7 CVSS 4.0 High — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High 3.9 3.6 disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High — — GitHub, Inc. via GitHub Security Advisories
7.5 CVSS 3.1 High — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N (score shown at the top: disclosure@vulncheck.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-59 · Link Following

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).
  • Monitor file creation in web directories and paths with traversal sequences (../).
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSfile integrity (FIM)endpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Affected products added · coderamp-labs/gitingest
    Oct 14, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 14, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.5
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 14, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 14, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • CVE published
    Oct 14, 2026 · VulnCheck

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 2× References added · Oct 14, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 14, 2026 – Oct 14, 2026

References

6 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Coderamp-labs
every CVE for this vendor
File handling
same class
CWE-59
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-2026-110767 is "Gitingest through 0.3.1 Arbitrary File Read via Symlink in Blob Ingestion", rated High. It affects Gitingest (Coderamp-labs); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.41% 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.