CVE-2019-18454
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 10.5 through 12.4 in link validation for RDoc wiki pages feature. It has XSS.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceCross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in GitLab's link validation for RDoc wiki pages. An attacker can inject malicious scripts through links embedded in RDoc-formatted wiki pages, which execute when other users view the content. Affects GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition versions 10.5 through 12.4.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 10.5.0, <= 12.4.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check GitLab versionRun `gitlab-rake gitlab:env:info` or check `/opt/gitlab/version` ( Omnibus install) or `git --version` for source install. In the Admin area, go to /admin/about for version info.Affected if The installed version is >= 10.5.0 and <= 12.4.0
-
Verify RDoc wiki feature is in useNavigate to any project wiki in the GitLab instance. Check if wiki pages exist and if they use RDoc formatting. Go to Project > Wiki > New Page and observe if RDoc is an available format option.Affected if RDoc-formatted wiki pages exist or can be created in the GitLab instance
-
Confirm wiki is enabled for projectsCheck if wikis are enabled at the instance level by going to Admin Area > Settings > General > Visibility and access controls, or inspect project settings to confirm the wiki feature toggle is enabled.Affected if Wiki functionality is enabled for any project on the GitLab instance
You are affected if your GitLab version falls between 10.5.0 and 12.4.0 inclusive AND the wiki feature is enabled and RDoc-formatted wiki pages can be viewed or created.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade GitLab to version 12.4.1 or later. If immediate upgrade is not possible, disable the RDoc wiki pages feature or implement input sanitization for wiki link validation as a temporary mitigation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-18454 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2019-18454 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data