CVE-2026-97229 BIT-gitlab-2026-97229
Integer Overflow or Wraparound in GitLab
Critical
Known exploited
- Severity
- 10.0 / 10
- Critical · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 27.30%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 98.06% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- Yes
- In CISA's catalog since Oct 29, 2026
- Weakness
- CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound
- Fix
- None yet
- No fixed version published
Exploited in the wild. GitLab Community Edition and Enterprise Edition Integer Overflow or Wraparound Vulnerability (GitLab Community Edition and Enterprise Edition). Required action: Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines. Due for U.S. federal agencies by Nov 1, 2026.
Description
GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 19.2 before 19.2.8, 19.3 before 19.3.5, and 19.4 before 19.4.2 that, under certain conditions, could have allowed an unauthenticated user to execute arbitrary code on the GitLab server via a specially crafted regular expression in a CI/CD configuration, due to insufficient regular expression validation.
How to fix
No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 10.0
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Weakness
CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound
The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.
How to prevent it
- Requirements: Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
- Requirements: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
- Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
- Implementation: Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range. Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
- Implementation: Understand the programming language's underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, "not-a-number" calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7] Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.
- Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Implementation: Examine compiler warnings closely and eliminate problems with potential security implications, such as signed / unsigned mismatch in memory operations, or use of uninitialized variables. Even if the weakness is rarely exploitable, a single failure may lead to the compromise of the entire system.
References
Advisories
Issue reports
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Added to CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
- Latest EPSS score
- Last updated by the source
- Remediation due for U.S. federal agencies
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-4642-5mcj-2rqw Forge: ASN.1 OID first arc truncation in asn1.oidToDer | Low | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| GHSA-4rm8-3hmm-39fg Pillow: Reachable undefined behavior in native integer operations, potentially leading to denial of service or logic integrity compromise | Medium | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| GHSA-f63g-mx39-3r38 Microsoft Security Advisory CVE-2026-85363 - .NET and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability | High | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| RUSTSEC-2026-0314 Guest can panic host through filesystem datetime overflow | Medium | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| GHSA-p6m2-r3w9-mpxw rclone local: crafted Range request against a translated symlink panics (DoS) | Medium | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| EEF-CVE-2026-82737 Ash.Vector wraps the 16-bit dimension header for vectors over 65,535 elements, corrupting data and crashing reads | Not rated yet | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| GHSA-mrpp-v6pg-p54x klever-go: SFT add-quantity `int64` overflow bypasses a finite per-nonce MaxSupply | High | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
| GHSA-cgc5-v3f2-8m2v Klever: Integer overflow in split-royalty validation enables unbounded minting of KLV (native token) | Critical | Same weakness, CWE-190 |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor