CVE-2026-11379
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 · uneditedGitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab EE affecting all versions from 13.11 prior to 18.11.6, 19.0 prior to 19.0.3, and 19.1 prior to 19.1.1 in which incorrect authorization in DAST site profile management could allow a user with Developer role to exfiltrate DAST site profile secrets under certain conditions.
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 · moderate confidenceGitLab EE contains an incorrect authorization vulnerability in DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) site profile management. A user with Developer role can exfiltrate sensitive secrets (such as API keys and credentials) stored in DAST site profiles that should be restricted to higher-privileged roles under certain conditions.
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>= 13.11.0, < 18.11.6>= 19.0.0, < 19.0.3= 19.1.0CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 GitLab versionRun 'gitlab-rake gitlab:version' or check the GitLab admin panel under Help > Version to obtain the exact installed versionAffected if The installed version falls within >= 13.11.0 and < 18.11.6, OR >= 19.0.0 and < 19.0.3, OR equals 19.1.0
-
Identify DAST site profilesNavigate to the GitLab admin panel under Security > DAST or use the API endpoint '/api/v4/security/dast_site_profiles' to list all DAST site profiles configured in the instanceAffected if DAST site profiles exist in the GitLab instance
-
Verify secret storage in DAST profilesReview each DAST site profile to check if it contains sensitive values such as API keys, tokens, usernames, passwords, or other credentials in fields like 'target', 'auth', 'exclude', or similar configuration sectionsAffected if Any DAST site profiles contain stored sensitive secrets or credentials
-
Check Developer role access to DAST profilesCreate a test user with Developer role or use an existing Developer account, then attempt to view DAST site profiles that are intended for higher-privileged roles (Maintainer, Owner, Admin) via the UI or API to verify unauthorized access is possibleAffected if A user with Developer role can view or retrieve DAST site profiles that contain sensitive secrets meant for higher-privileged roles
The environment is affected if the installed GitLab version is within the affected ranges AND DAST site profiles with sensitive credentials exist AND Developer role users can access those profiles intended for higher-privileged roles.
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 · scoped18.11.619.0.3
Upgrade GitLab EE to version 18.11.6, 19.0.3, 19.1.1 or later. After upgrading, audit existing DAST site profiles to verify no unauthorized access occurred and confirm proper authorization controls are enforced.
18.11.6, 19.0.3, or 19.1.1 (select based on your current major version branch)
- 1. Identify your current GitLab version by checking the GitLab administration area or running `gitlab-rake gitlab:version`
- 2. Determine which version branch you are on (18.x, 19.0.x, or 19.1.x) to select the appropriate fixed version
- 3. Plan your upgrade path following GitLab's upgrade documentation: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/update/
- 4. Create a full backup of your GitLab instance using `gitlab-backup-create` or the omnibus backup tools
- 5. Stop GitLab services using `gitlab-ctl stop`
- 6. Upgrade to the minimum fixed version for your branch: 18.11.6+ for 18.x, 19.0.3+ for 19.0.x, or 19.1.1+ for 19.1.x
- 7. Reconfigure GitLab using `gitlab-ctl reconfigure`
- 8. Restart GitLab services using `gitlab-ctl start`
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-11379 — 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-2026-11379 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