CVE-2022-24826 [Critical] | Security Vulnerability in Git Large File Storage

On Windows, if Git LFS operates on a malicious repository with a `..exe` file as well as a file named `git.exe`, and `git.exe` is not found in `PATH`, the `..exe` program will be executed, permitting the attacker to execute arbitrary code. This does not affect Unix systems. Similarly, if the malicious repository contains files named `..exe` and `cygpath.exe`, and `cygpath.exe` is not found in `PATH`, the `..exe` program will be executed when certain Git LFS commands are run. More generally, if the current working directory contains any file with a base name of `.` and a file extension from `PATHEXT` (except `.bat` and `.cmd`), and also contains another file with the same base name as a program Git LFS intends to execute (such as `git`, `cygpath`, or `uname`) and any file extension from `PATHEXT` (including `.bat` and `.cmd`), then, on Windows, when Git LFS attempts to execute the intended program the `..exe`, `..com`, etc., file will be executed instead, but only if the intended program is not found in any directory listed in `PATH`. The vulnerability occurs because when Git LFS detects that the program it intends to run does not exist in any directory listed in `PATH` then Git LFS passes an empty string as the executable file path to the Go `os/exec` package, which contains a bug such that, on Windows, it prepends the name of the current working directory (i.e., `.`) to the empty string without adding a path separator, and as a result searches in that directory for a file with the base name `.` combined with any file extension from `PATHEXT`, executing the first one it finds. (The reason `..bat` and `..cmd` files are not executed in the same manner is that, although the Go `os/exec` package tries to execute them just as it does a `..exe` file, the Microsoft Win32 API `CreateProcess()` family of functions have an undocumented feature in that they apparently recognize when a caller is attempting to execute a batch script file and instead run the `cmd.exe` command interpreter, passing the full set of command line arguments as parameters. These are unchanged from the command line arguments set by Git LFS, and as such, the intended program's name is the first, resulting in a command line like `cmd.exe /c git`, which then fails.) Git LFS has resolved this vulnerability by always reporting an error when a program is not found in any directory listed in `PATH` rather than passing an empty string to the Go `os/exec` package in this case. The bug in the Go `os/exec` package has been reported to the Go project and is expected to be patched after this security advisory is published. The problem was introduced in version 2.12.1 and is patched in version 3.1.3. Users of affected versions should upgrade to version 3.1.3. There are currently no known workarounds at this time.

#	Date	Old EPSS score	New EPSS score	Delta (New - Old)
1	2025-11-21	0.39%	0.26%	-0.13%
2	2025-11-18	0.26%	0.39%	+0.13%
3	2025-10-13	—	0.26%	—

Date

Old EPSS score

New EPSS score

Delta (New - Old)

2025-11-21

0.39%

0.26%

-0.13%

2025-11-18

0.26%

0.39%

+0.13%

2025-10-13

—

0.26%

—

Base score	Version	Severity	Vector	Exploitability	Impact	Score source
9.8	3.1	CRITICAL	`CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H` Click to expand Attack vector (AV:N) Could be attacked over the internet or any normal routed network—not just someone sitting at the machine. Attack complexity (AC:L) Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup. Privileges required (PR:N) No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough. User interaction (UI:N) Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping. Scope (S:U) Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems. Confidentiality (C:H) Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way. Integrity (I:H) They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt. Availability (A:H) Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.	3.9	5.9	[email protected]
7.8	3.1	HIGH	`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H` Click to expand Attack vector (AV:L) They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by. Attack complexity (AC:L) Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup. Privileges required (PR:N) No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough. User interaction (UI:R) A real person has to do something—click, install, enable—otherwise it doesn’t land. Scope (S:U) Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems. Confidentiality (C:H) Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way. Integrity (I:H) They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt. Availability (A:H) Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.	1.8	5.9	[email protected]
4.4	2.0	MEDIUM	`AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P` Click to expand Access vector (AV:L) Requires local access to the target system. Access complexity (AC:M) Exploitation needs some favorable conditions, but not exceptional ones. Authentication (AU:N) No authentication is required. Confidentiality impact (C:P) Partial confidentiality impact. Integrity impact (I:P) Partial integrity impact. Availability impact (A:P) Partial availability impact.	3.4	6.4	[email protected]

Base score

Version

Severity

Vector

Exploitability

Impact

Score source

9.8

3.1

CRITICAL

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H Click to expand

Attack vector (AV:N): Could be attacked over the internet or any normal routed network—not just someone sitting at the machine.
Attack complexity (AC:L): Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:N): No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough.
User interaction (UI:N): Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U): Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:H): Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way.
Integrity (I:H): They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt.
Availability (A:H): Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.

3.9

5.9

[email protected]

7.8

3.1

HIGH

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H Click to expand

Attack vector (AV:L): They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L): Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:N): No account or special rights needed—anonymous or random user is enough.
User interaction (UI:R): A real person has to do something—click, install, enable—otherwise it doesn’t land.
Scope (S:U): Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:H): Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way.
Integrity (I:H): They could widely tamper with or forge data—trust in the data is badly hurt.
Availability (A:H): Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.

1.8

5.9

[email protected]

4.4

2.0

MEDIUM

AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P Click to expand

Access vector (AV:L): Requires local access to the target system.
Access complexity (AC:M): Exploitation needs some favorable conditions, but not exceptional ones.
Authentication (AU:N): No authentication is required.
Confidentiality impact (C:P): Partial confidentiality impact.
Integrity impact (I:P): Partial integrity impact.
Availability impact (A:P): Partial availability impact.

3.4

6.4

[email protected]

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2022-24826

Vendor	Product	Version	Raw CPE
git_large_file_storage_project	git_large_file_storage	>= 2.12.1, < 3.1.3	cpe:2.3:a:git_large_file_storage_project:git_large_file_storage::::::::

References for CVE-2022-24826

URL	Tags
https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/releases	Third Party Advisory
https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/security/advisories/GHSA-6rw3-3whw-jvjj	Third Party Advisory

URL

CVE-2022-24826 | Git LFS can execute a binary from the current directory on Windows

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2022-24826

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2022-24826

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2022-24826

GitHub Security Advisory for CVE-2022-24826

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2022-24826

References for CVE-2022-24826