CVE-2023-2190
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 13.10 before 15.11.10, all versions starting from 16.0 before 16.0.6, all versions starting from 16.1 before 16.1.1. It may be possible for users to view new commits to private projects in a fork created while the project was public.
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 confidenceThis is an authorization bypass vulnerability in GitLab where forks created while a project was public may continue exposing commits even after the original project becomes private. When a user creates a fork from a public project and the parent project is later made private, the fork relationship can still be exploited to view commits that should no longer be accessible.
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>= 13.10.0, < 15.11.10>= 16.0.0, < 16.0.6>= 16.1.0, < 16.1.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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 installed GitLab versionRun `sudo gitlab-rake gitlab:env:info` or check the GitLab admin panel under the Help > Version section. Alternatively, check the version file at `/opt/gitlab/version` or via `gitlab --version`.Affected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: 13.10.0 to 15.11.9, 16.0.0 to 16.0.5, or 16.1.0.
-
Identify projects that changed from public to privateQuery the GitLab database: `SELECT projects.path, projects.visibility_level, project_attributes.created_at FROM projects JOIN project_attributes ON projects.id = project_attributes.project_id WHERE project_attributes.visibility_level_changed = true AND project_attributes.previous_visibility_level = 20 AND projects.visibility_level = 0;` Or review project history in the admin panel.Affected if Any project exists that was previously public (visibility_level 20) and is now private (visibility_level 0).
-
Audit fork relationships for affected projectsQuery forks: `SELECT forked_from_project_id, id, path, visibility_level FROM projects WHERE forked_from_project_id IN (SELECT id FROM projects WHERE visibility_level = 0) AND forked_from_project_id IS NOT NULL;` Or review fork network graphs in project settings.Affected if A fork exists where the parent project is now private but the fork relationship was created when the parent was public.
-
Review commit access logs for unauthorized viewsCheck GitLab audit logs in the admin panel under Audit Events, or query: `SELECT user_id, entity_id, details FROM audit_events WHERE entity_type = 'Project' AND action LIKE '%view%commit%' ORDER BY created_at DESC;` Look for access to commits via fork URLs after parent became private.Affected if Commits are being accessed through fork URLs for projects that were made private, indicating the vulnerability may be actively exploited.
You are affected if your GitLab version is below the fixed releases AND you have projects that transitioned from public to private with existing forks.
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.
dbcve · scoped15.11.1016.0.616.1.1
Upgrade GitLab to version 15.11.10, 16.0.6, 16.1.1 or later. Additionally, audit fork relationships for projects that transitioned from public to private and review access logs for any unauthorized commit viewing.
15.11.10 (or latest 15.11.x); 16.0.6 (or latest 16.0.x); 16.1.1 (or latest 16.1.x)
- Identify your current GitLab version by navigating to the GitLab admin area or running `gitlab-rake gitlab:env:info`
- Determine which upgrade path applies based on your current version (15.x, 16.0.x, or 16.1.x)
- For GitLab 15.x installations: Upgrade to version 15.11.10 or later (preferably latest 15.11.x)
- For GitLab 16.0.x installations: Upgrade to version 16.0.6 or later (preferably latest 16.0.x)
- For GitLab 16.1.x installations: Upgrade to version 16.1.1 or later (preferably latest 16.1.x)
- Follow standard GitLab upgrade procedures for your deployment method (omnibus, source, or helm chart)
- Verify the upgrade completed successfully and test that fork authorization behaves correctly
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2023-2190 — 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-2023-2190 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