GitLabApplication
CVE-2020-13355
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 has been discovered in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions starting from 8.14. A path traversal is found in LFS Upload that allows attacker to overwrite certain specific paths on the server. Affected versions are: >=8.14, <13.3.9,>=13.4, <13.4.5,>=13.5, <13.5.2.
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 confidenceA path traversal vulnerability exists in GitLab's LFS (Large File Storage) upload functionality across multiple versions from 8.14 onward. The flaw allows authenticated attackers to traverse directories and overwrite specific files on the server through specially crafted LFS upload requests.
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
GitLabApplication
>= 8.14.0, < 13.3.9>= 13.4.0, < 13.4.5>= 13.5.0, < 13.5.2CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Identify GitLab versionRun `sudo gitlab-rake gitlab:env:info` or check the GitLab admin panel under Admin Area > Dashboard to find the installed version number.Affected if The version falls within 8.14.0 to 13.3.8, 13.4.0 to 13.4.4, or 13.5.0 to 13.5.1.
-
Verify LFS is enabledCheck the GitLab configuration file (gitlab.rb) for `gitlab_rails['lfs_enabled']` setting, or navigate to Admin Area > Settings > General > Large File Storage (LFS) and confirm if LFS is enabled.Affected if LFS is enabled on the instance.
-
Confirm LFS upload permissionsCheck if any user roles or projects have LFS upload capabilities enabled. Review project settings under Project > Settings > Large File Storage to see if LFS is configured for any repositories.Affected if Users or groups have permission to upload LFS objects to any project.
-
Review LFS object storage configurationInspect the GitLab configuration for LFS storage paths in gitlab.rb (`gitlab_rails['lfs_storage_path']` or `lfs_object_store_` settings) to determine where LFS files are stored.Affected if LFS is using local storage without strict path validation.
You are affected if your GitLab version is within the vulnerable range AND LFS is enabled with upload permissions for authenticated users.
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 data13.3.913.4.513.5.2
Upgrade GitLab to version 13.3.9, 13.4.5, 13.5.2 or later. If immediate patching is not feasible, restrict LFS upload permissions and monitor for unauthorized file modifications.
Fix this in GitLab
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,888.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-13355 — 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-2020-13355 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