CVE-2023-29007
Git-Scm Git ≤ 2.30.9
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-29007 is a high-severity Injection (CWE-74) vulnerability in Git-Scm Git. Its CVSS base score is 7.0 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 7% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-32622
Vulnerability Data
Git is a revision control system. Prior to versions 2.30.9, 2.31.8, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, 2.34.8, 2.35.8, 2.36.6, 2.37.7, 2.38.5, 2.39.3, and 2.40.1, a specially crafted `.gitmodules` file with submodule URLs that are longer than 1024 characters can used to exploit a…
more
bug in `config.c::git_config_copy_or_rename_section_in_file()`. This bug can be used to inject arbitrary configuration into a user's `$GIT_DIR/config` when attempting to remove the configuration section associated with that submodule. When the attacker injects configuration values which specify executables to run (such as `core.pager`, `core.editor`, `core.sshCommand`, etc.) this can lead to a remote code execution. A fix A fix is available in versions 2.30.9, 2.31.8, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, 2.34.8, 2.35.8, 2.36.6, 2.37.7, 2.38.5, 2.39.3, and 2.40.1. As a workaround, avoid running `git submodule deinit` on untrusted repositories or without prior inspection of any submodule sections in `$GIT_DIR/config`.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.2.1V1.2.3V1.2.5V1.2.8
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Developer assessments and testing (including injection-focused techniques) identify improper neutralization of special elements, and the verifiable flaw remediation corrects them pre-deployment.
Identifies indicators of injection attacks (command, SQL, LDAP, etc.) via anomaly and attack monitoring.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and output encoding that prevent injection flaws.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches injection vulnerabilities before release.
Logging supports detection of injection attempts but does not prevent the weakness.
Monitoring activities can identify active injection attacks after they occur.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and output encoding that directly prevent injection flaws.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against injection attacks in software design.
Secure architecture principles reduce injection surfaces but do not prescribe specific neutralization techniques.