CVE-2026-82254
largeCrafted pack data causes panic and OOM DoS in gitoxide before 0.69.0
Gitoxide before 0.69.0, the Rust implementation of Git, contains unchecked array indexing in its delta-application code and does not cap allocations driven by attacker-controlled size headers in gix-pack. An attacker who controls a pack stream — for example by hosting a malicious repository or tampering with a remote during clone or fetch — can trigger an unhandled panic or drive the process into unbounded memory allocation and an out-of-memory kill. The impact is denial of service only: the CVSS 4.0 vector shows high availability impact with no confidentiality or integrity impact, and no code execution. Anyone running applications or tooling built on gix/gix-pack versions below 0.69.0 that receive pack data from untrusted or network-accessible sources is affected. There is no known exploitation in the wild, no public proof of concept, and EPSS assigns only a 0.4% probability of exploitation within 30 days.
What to do: Upgrade gitoxide and the gix/gix-pack crates to 0.69.0 or later. Restrict clone and fetch operations to trusted remotes where feasible, and monitor processes that consume untrusted pack data for abrupt panics or memory-exhaustion kills. Rust applications with pinned gix dependencies should be rebuilt against the patched release.
| gitoxide (gix / gix-pack) | all versions before 0.69.0 |
Order-of-magnitude estimate by the model from install counts, market share and public scan data it knows; verify before quoting.
gitoxide before 0.69.0 contains unchecked array indexing in delta application and uncapped allocation from attacker-controlled size headers in gix-pack. Attackers can send crafted pack data during clone or fetch operations to trigger panics or out-of-memory process kills.
- Weakness
- CWE-248
- Vector
- CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
In the news0 stories
No ingested article mentions this CVE yet.