Summary
GitPython: Unguarded git option forwarding in Repo.init enables arbitrary command execution via --template clone hooks
Repo.init() forwards **kwargs verbatim to git init with no unsafe-option guard and no allow_unsafe_options parameter. git init --template=<dir> copies <dir>/hooks/* into the new repo's .git/hooks, so an attacker-controlled template kwarg plants a hook that executes on the next git operation → arbitrary code execution. --template is already recognized as unsafe for clone (it is on unsafe_git_clone_options, and GHSA-6p8h-3wgx-97gf covers the clone path), but Repo.init is a distinct method that never received a guard and needs an independent fix.
Root Cause
Repo.init(path, mkdir, odbt, expand_vars, **kwargs) is a bare git.init(**kwargs) (git/repo/base.py:1435) with no check_unsafe_options and no allow_unsafe_options.
Proof of Concept
# attacker stages /evil/hooks/post-commit (executable)
from git import Repo
Repo.init(path, template="/evil")
# next commit runs /evil/hooks/post-commit -> ACE
Attack Chain
- Entry: attacker stages
/evil/hooks/post-commit(executable) and gets the app to callRepo.init(path, template='/evil'). - Check: NONE on
Repo.init. Bypass proof: base.py:1435 is a baregit.init(**kwargs). argv (observed):['git','init','--template=/evil']. - Sink: git copies
/evil/hooks/post-commit→<repo>/.git/hooks/post-commit. - Impact: next commit runs the hook → arbitrary code execution.
Bypass Evidence
Independently reproduced (gate harness): Repo.init(dst, template='<evil>') → argv ['git','init','--template=<evil>'] unguarded; hook copied into .git/hooks/post-commit; after git commit the INIT_ACE marker was created. --separate-git-dir=<path> is a parallel arbitrary-redirect vector through the same unguarded sink (value control only).
Affected Versions
GitPython <= 3.1.57 (unguarded git.init(**kwargs) present verbatim on the latest release tag).
Impact
Arbitrary code execution (hook fires on next git op) at the privileges of the host process. Two preconditions raise attack complexity (AC:H): the app must forward a template= kwarg (KEY control) AND the attacker must stage an executable hook directory at a known path, the same profile GHSA-6p8h-3wgx-97gf accepted as HIGH for the clone path. Default allow_unsafe_options is irrelevant here because Repo.init has no guard at all.
Untrusted input is evaluated as executable code within the application's runtime environment. Typical impact: arbitrary code execution within the application's privilege context.
GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). 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 (3.1.58); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
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
Add a check_unsafe_options guard (with an allow_unsafe_options parameter) to Repo.init, consulting a denylist that includes --template and --separate-git-dir (path-taking / hook-installing options).
Reported by zx (Jace), GitHub: @manus-use
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R? GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R is a high-severity code injection vulnerability in GitPython (pip), affecting versions <= 3.1.57. It is fixed in 3.1.58. Untrusted input is evaluated as executable code within the application's runtime environment.
- How severe is GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R? GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R has a CVSS score of 7.5 (High). 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.
- Which versions of GitPython are affected by GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R? GitPython (pip) versions <= 3.1.57 is affected.
- Is there a fix for GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R? Yes. GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R is fixed in 3.1.58. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R 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
- What actually determines whether GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R 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.
- How do I fix GHSA-9RJ7-RF2P-W77R? Upgrade
GitPythonto 3.1.58 or later.