CVE-2026-22253VulnerabilityPublished 8 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-22253: charmbracelet soft-serve · Incorrect Authorization

Affects charmbracelet soft-serveSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.4 Medium : upgrade to 0.11.2 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.4Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.11.2

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 8 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade soft-serve and charmbracelet/soft-serve to 0.11.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
charmbraceletsoft-serve	Affected <0.11.2	Fixed in 0.11.2
GitHubcharmbracelet/soft-serve`pkg:github/charmbracelet/soft-serve`Other threats	Affected <0.11.2	Fixed in 0.11.2

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade all Soft Serve instances to version 0.11.2 or later, where the authorization bypass has been fixed. Until upgrades are completed, organizations should restrict repository write access to trusted users only and monitor LFS lock deletion activities for anomalies, such as unexpected forced deletions. Implementing enhanced logging and alerting on repository lock operations can help detect potential exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations should enforce strong authentication mechanisms and credential hygiene to reduce the risk of compromised accounts being used to exploit this vulnerability. Regular audits of repository permissions and user roles will further minimize exposure. Where feasible, consider isolating critical repositories or employing additional access controls to limit the impact of potential misuse of write privileges.

Description

Soft Serve is a self-hostable Git server for the command line. Prior to version 0.11.2, an authorization bypass in the LFS lock deletion endpoint allows any authenticated user with repository write access to delete locks owned by other users by setting the force flag. The vulnerable code path processes force deletions before retrieving user context, bypassing ownership validation entirely. This issue has been patched in version 0.11.2.

Impact

For European organizations utilizing Soft Serve for Git repository management, this vulnerability poses a risk to the integrity and availability of repository locks, which are critical for coordinating concurrent file edits in large file storage scenarios. Unauthorized deletion of LFS locks by users with write access can lead to conflicts, data corruption, or workflow disruptions, potentially delaying development cycles or causing accidental overwrites. While the breach does not expose confidential data, the disruption to development processes can have operational and reputational consequences, especially for organizations relying on strict version control and collaboration protocols. The requirement for authenticated write access limits the attack surface to internal or trusted users, but insider threats or compromised credentials could be leveraged to exploit this vulnerability. Given the increasing adoption of self-hosted Git solutions in European tech sectors, failure to patch could impact software development integrity and availability.

CWE-863Incorrect Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #17OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product performs an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action, but it does not correctly perform the check.
Architecture and Design
Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries.
Architecture and Design
Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jan 2026, 19:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-863

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats