Know every vulnerabilitybefore it knows you.
DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.
GHSA-6cqf-375w-639g
No affected components available
Summary
Gitea's RSS/Atom feed handlers accept API-token Basic auth but perform no token-scope or
public-only enforcement. A personal access token that is correctly blocked (HTTP 403) from a
private repository on /raw, /media, /archive, and /releases/download/... — because it is
marked public-only or lacks the repository scope category — still returns that repository's
private content through the feed routes. This is a token-confinement bypass and appears to be an
incomplete fix of #37698, which added that scope enforcement to the download handlers but not to the
sibling feed handlers.
This is not a cross-user access bug: the requesting account must still legitimately have repo
read access (RepoAssignment + reqUnitCodeReader are enforced). What is bypassed is the guarantee
that a confined token cannot reach private content — which is exactly the property #37698 was
shipped to provide for downloads, and which matters when such a token is handed to a third-party
service/CI, leaked, or used in a lower-trust integration.
Details
#37698 added context.CheckTokenScopes / CheckRepoScopedToken
(services/context/permission.go) to the raw / media / archive / attachment download handlers, so a
public-only or wrong-scope-category token cannot read private-repo content even when the owning user
otherwise has access.
The feed handlers are registered with webAuth.AllowBasic (so they accept token Basic auth) but call
no scope / public-only check. A grep for CheckTokenScopes / CheckRepoScopedToken / IsApiToken
across routers/web/feed/ and the release feed handlers returns nothing.
Affected routes (all token-reachable via webAuth.AllowBasic, none call the scope check):
| Route | Handler | Private data exposed |
|---|---|---|
| GET /{owner}/{repo}.rss / .atom | repo.Home → handleRepoHomeFeed (view_home.go) | last-10 commits: SHA, full message, author name + email |
| GET /{owner}/{repo}/rss/branch/*, /atom/branch/* | feed.RenderBranchFeed* → ShowBranchFeed (routers/web/feed/branch.go) | same commit data, any branch |
| GET /{owner}/{repo}/releases.rss / .atom | ReleasesFeedRSS/Atom (routers/web/repo/release.go) → ShowReleaseFeed | private release names, notes, descriptions |
| GET /{owner}/{repo}/tags.rss / .atom | TagsListFeedRSS/Atom → ShowReleaseFeed | private tag names + messages |
| GET /{user}.rss / .atom | showUserFeed (routers/web/feed/profile.go), includePrivate = self \|\| admin | the token owner's private cross-repo activity stream |
Inconsistency that pins this down: the branch-feed routes sit in the same route group as /raw,
/media, /archive (all of which call checkDownloadTokenScope), and releases.rss sits next to
/releases/attachments/{uuid} and /releases/download/... (both go through ServeAttachment → scope
check). Only the feeds were missed. The API equivalents (ListReleases / ListTags) are scope-gated
via tokenRequiresScopes.
Two distinct confinement bypasses:
- Public-only bypass. A token created with the public-only option is blocked (403) from a
private repo on
/raw,/archive,/releases/download/..., but returns private commit / release data via.../releases.rss,.../rss/branch/*,/{owner}/{repo}.rss, and the owner's private activity via/{user}.rss. - Scope-category bypass. A token scoped to only e.g.
read:issue(noread:repository) is rejected by the download handlers but reads repository commit/release content via the feeds.
PoC
Verified live against the official gitea/gitea:1.26.2 Docker image (sqlite, feeds enabled).
Setup: non-admin user alice; private repo alice/secret with a commit
"SECRET-COMMIT-MARKER ..." (file secret.txt) and a release "Private Release" / body
"SECRET-RELEASE-MARKER ...". Two confined personal access tokens, both sent via HTTP Basic so the
auth method is identical across download and feed — only the route differs:
- Token A: scopes
["public-only", "read:repository"] - Token B: scopes
["read:issue"]
# Token A — download is correctly blocked, feeds leak private content:
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_A https://<host>/alice/secret/raw/branch/main/secret.txt # => 403 (fix works)
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_A https://<host>/alice/secret/rss/branch/main # => 200, <title>SECRET-COMMIT-MARKER ...</title>
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_A https://<host>/alice/secret/releases.rss # => 200, SECRET-RELEASE-MARKER ...
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_A "https://<host>/alice.rss" # => 200, private activity
# Token B — wrong scope category, same split:
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_B https://<host>/alice/secret/raw/branch/main/secret.txt # => 403
curl -u alice:$TOKEN_B https://<host>/alice/secret/rss/branch/main # => 200, private commit leaked
Anonymous baseline returns 404 on the repo feeds (data is genuinely private) and a marker-free 200 on
/alice.rss (public activity only) — confirming the leak is gated only by the missing token check.
Impact
Information disclosure of private commit metadata (SHA, message, author name+email), release/tag notes, and the owner's private activity stream, to the holder of a confined token that was specifically configured not to reach private content. Not raw file blobs (feeds don't serve file contents). Requires a token belonging to an account that already has repo read access, so the realistic threat is a leaked / shared / lower-trust token rather than an anonymous attacker — which is precisely the threat model #37698 addressed for downloads.
Suggested remediation
Add a token-scope check at the top of each feed handler, mirroring checkDownloadTokenScope:
if context.CheckRepoScopedToken(ctx, ctx.Repo.Repository, auth_model.Read); ctx.Written() {
return
}
for ShowBranchFeed, ShowRepoFeed, ShowFileFeed, ShowReleaseFeed (repo feeds). For the user
feed, gate includePrivate behind a non-public-only token (or require the user / repository
scope) so a confined token can't pull private activity.
The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker needs basic access or low-level privileges. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a low impact on the confidentiality of the information.
Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.
Probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days.
We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.
- CVE-2026-50105Alias
Browse More
Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.
Checkout DevGuard