CVE-2026-3854 GitHub flaw enables remote code execution


CVE-2026-3854 GitHub flaw enables remote code execution

Pierluigi Paganini
April 28, 2026

Critical GitHub flaw CVE-2026-3854 lets attackers run code with a single git push, exploiting a command injection bug.

Researchers found a critical vulnerability in GitHub, tracked as CVE-2026-3854, that allows remote code execution through a simple git push. The vulnerability affects GitHub Enterprise Cloud, GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency, GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Enterprise Managed Users, and GitHub Enterprise Server.

The flaw is caused by a command injection issue, meaning an attacker with repository push access can run arbitrary commands on affected systems. With a high severity score, the bug poses serious risks for both GitHub.com and GitHub Enterprise Server users.

“An improper neutralization of special elements vulnerability was identified in GitHub Enterprise Server that allowed an attacker with push access to a repository to achieve remote code execution on the instance.” reads the advisory. “During a git push operation, user-supplied push option values were not properly sanitized before being included in internal service headers. Because the internal header format used a delimiter character that could also appear in user input, an attacker could inject additional metadata fields through crafted push option values.”

The flaw was reported through GitHub’s bug bounty program and fixed in Enterprise Server versions 3.14.24, 3.15.19, 3.16.15, 3.17.12, 3.18.6, and 3.19.3.

Wiz researchers reported the vulnerability on March 4, 2026, and GitHub addressed the issue within two hours.

When code is pushed to GitHub, internal services exchange metadata about the operation. The flaw arose because user-supplied git push options were not properly sanitized and were embedded into this metadata. Attackers could exploit delimiter handling to inject extra fields, tricking downstream services into treating malicious input as trusted data. This allowed them to alter execution environments, bypass sandbox protections, and run arbitrary commands on the server.

GitHub quickly fixed the issue by sanitizing inputs and released patches for Enterprise Server versions. The investigation found no real-world exploitation beyond researchers’ tests, and no customer data was compromised.

When code is pushed to GitHub, internal services exchange metadata about the operation. The flaw arose because user-supplied git push options were not properly sanitized and were embedded into this metadata. Attackers could exploit delimiter handling to inject extra fields, tricking downstream services into treating malicious input as trusted data. This allowed them to alter execution environments, bypass sandbox protections, and run arbitrary commands on the server.

GitHub quickly fixed the issue by sanitizing inputs and released patches for Enterprise Server versions. An investigation found no real-world exploitation beyond researchers’ tests, and no customer data was compromised.

Wiz researchers pointed out that this flaw was found in closed-source code using AI, showing a shift in vulnerability discovery. Despite its complexity, it’s easy to exploit. On GitHub, it enabled remote code execution on shared storage nodes, potentially exposing millions of repositories. On Enterprise Server, it could lead to full system compromise, including access to all repositories and sensitive internal data.

“GitHub Enterprise Server customers should upgrade immediately – at the time of this writing, our data indicates that 88% of instances are still vulnerable.” reported Wiz.

Attackers could escalate the flaw to full remote code execution by abusing injected fields. By altering the rails_env value, they bypassed sandbox protections and forced hooks to run in an unsafe mode. They then redirected the hook directory and used path traversal to execute arbitrary files. This chain allowed commands to run as the git service user, giving full control over the system, including filesystem access and internal configurations.

On GitHub, the same flaw could be exploited by injecting an enterprise-mode flag through internal metadata, enabling code execution even though custom hooks are normally disabled. Due to GitHub’s multi-tenant architecture, this access could expose data across environments, potentially allowing attackers to read millions of repositories on shared storage nodes.

The issue shows how a single git push could exploit trust between internal services. GitHub urged immediate patching and highlighted the need to secure how user-controlled data flows through internal protocols in complex systems.

“A single git push command was enough to exploit a flaw in GitHub’s internal protocol and achieve code execution on backend infrastructure.” concludes the report.”The vulnerability chain highlights a pattern that extends well beyond GitHub. When multiple services written in different languages pass data through a shared internal protocol, the assumptions each service makes about that data become a critical attack surface. In this case, one service assumed push option values were safe to embed verbatim. “

Follow me on Twitter: @securityaffairs and Facebook and Mastodon

Pierluigi Paganini

(SecurityAffairs – hacking, CVE-2026-3854)







Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


There’s something oddly brilliant about outsourcing your curiosity to an AI that doesn’t get tired or awkward. After all, if an AI agent can call thousands of pubs and build a Guinness price index, why stop there? Why not send one loose into the wild to track the cost of your daily caffeine fix or your late-night ramen cravings?

I’m sold — I want one of those

That’s exactly the kind of domino effect sparked by a recent experiment inspired by Rachel Duffy from The Traitors. A developer built an AI voice agent that sounded natural enough to chat up bartenders and casually ask for Guinness prices, compiling the data into a public index. It worked so well that most people on the other end didn’t even clock that they were speaking to a machine. And just like that, a slightly chaotic, very clever idea turned into something surprisingly useful.

Now imagine applying that same idea to coffee and ramen. Because if there are two things people are oddly loyal and sensitive about, it’s how much they’re paying for a flat white or a bowl of tonkotsu.

A “CaffIndex,” for instance, could map out the price of cappuccinos across cities, highlighting everything from overpriced aesthetic cafés to hidden gems that don’t charge $3 for foam. Similarly, a “Ramen Radar” could track where you’re getting the most bang for your broth, whether it’s a premium bowl or a spot that somehow gets everything right. Don’t giggle, I’m serious.

The appeal isn’t just novelty. It’s scale. Calling up a handful of places yourself is tedious. Getting real-time, city-wide data? Nearly impossible. But an AI agent doesn’t mind dialing a thousand numbers, repeating the same question, and logging every answer with monk-like patience. What you get in return is a living, breathing map of prices.

It’s not all sunshine and roses

Of course, it is not all smooth sipping and slurping. There is a slightly uneasy side to this, too. Questions around consent and transparency start to creep in, and you cannot help but wonder if every business would be okay with being surveyed by an AI that sounds just a little too real. In the original experiment, the AI was designed to be honest when asked directly, but let’s be real: most people aren’t going to question a friendly voice casually asking about prices. It feels harmless in the moment, and that is exactly what makes it a bit tricky.

Still, there is something genuinely exciting about the idea. Not in a scary, robots-are-taking-over kind of way, but in a way that makes you pause and think, this could actually be useful if handled right. Prices are creeping up everywhere, from your rent to that comforting bowl of ramen you treat yourself to after a long day. Having something that keeps track of it all feels like a small win.

Maybe that is the real takeaway here. Today it is Guinness. Tomorrow it could be your morning coffee or your go-to ramen spot. It makes you wonder how long it will be before your phone steps in, calls up a café, asks about their espresso, and saves you from spending more than you should. Because honestly, if AI is willing to do the boring work for you, the least it can do is make sure your next cup and your next bowl actually feel worth it.



Source link