🛡️ CVE-2026-58425 — gitea.dev
Description
Gitea: OAuth token introspection returns metadata of tokens issued to other clients (RFC 7662 section 4 violation)
Live reproduction against Gitea 1.26.1
Setup: Gitea 1.26.1 docker stack with two users (admin and victim) and two OAuth applications owned by different users:
```
Client A: id=5dda747d-7fdd-4694-85ff-ce4f893ce51e owner=admin
Client B: id=588f778f-4a41-4914-ae01-85d776c369db owner=victim
```
admin runs an OAuth flow against Client A and obtains an access token. victim (acting through Client B's credentials) calls the introspection endpoint with Client A's access token in the body:
```
$ curl -s -u "$B_ID:$B_SEC" -X POST http://localhost:3001/login/oauth/introspect \
--data-urlencode "token=$CLIENT_A_ACCESS_TOKEN"
{
"active": true,
"username": "admin",
"iss": "http://localhost:3001",
"sub": "1",
"aud": [
"5dda747d-7fdd-4694-85ff-ce4f893ce51e"
]
}
```
Note the aud claim: the server explicitly states the token's audience is Client A, yet returns the full metadata to Client B. Per RFC 7662 section 4 ("The authorization server SHOULD also limit the information it discloses about each token to the resources that are authorized to receive it") the introspection result must not be disclosed to clients other than the token's audience.
Full reproduction script attached as poc.sh. Full session log attached as live_run.log.
Root cause
routers/web/auth/oauth2_provider.go:130-175 IntrospectOAuth:
```go
func IntrospectOAuth(ctx *context.Context) {
clientIDValid := false
authHeader := ctx.Req.Header.Get("Authorization")
if parsed, ok := httpauth.ParseAuthorizationHeader(authHeader); ok && parsed.BasicAuth != nil {
clientID, clientSecret := parsed.BasicAuth.Username, parsed.BasicAuth.Password
app, err := auth.GetOAuth2ApplicationByClientID(ctx, clientID)
if err != nil && !auth.IsErrOauthClientIDInvalid(err) {
log.Error("Error retrieving client_id: %v", err)
ctx.HTTPError(http.StatusInternalServerError)
return
}
clientIDValid = err == nil && app.ValidateClientSecret([]byte(clientSecret))
}
if !clientIDValid {
ctx.Resp.Header().Set("WWW-Authenticate", Basic realm="Gitea OAuth2")
ctx.PlainText(http.StatusUnauthorized, "no valid authorization")
return
}
var response struct {
Active bool json:"active"
Scope string json:"scope,omitempty"
Username string json:"username,omitempty"
jwt.RegisteredClaims
}
form := web.GetForm(ctx).(*forms.IntrospectTokenForm)
token, err := oauth2_provider.ParseToken(form.Token, oauth2_provider.DefaultSigningKey)
if err == nil {
grant, err := auth.GetOAuth2GrantByID(ctx, token.GrantID)
if err == nil && grant != nil {
app, err := auth.GetOAuth2ApplicationByID(ctx, grant.ApplicationID) // shadows the introspecting client's app
if err == nil && app != nil {
response.Active = true
response.Scope = grant.Scope
response.RegisteredClaims = oauth2_provider.NewJwtRegisteredClaimsFromUser(app.ClientID, grant.UserID, nil)
}
if user, err := user_model.GetUserByID(ctx, grant.UserID); err == nil {
response.Username = user.Name
}
}
}
ctx.JSON(http.StatusOK, response)
}
```
The handler:
1. Authenticates the introspecting client via HTTP Basic (app.ValidateClientSecret). The local variable app at this point references the introspecting client.
2. Loads the grant for form.Token via auth.GetOAuth2GrantByID(ctx, token.GrantID).
3. Reassigns app to auth.GetOAuth2ApplicationByID(ctx, grant.ApplicationID) (line 162). After this point, app is the token's issuing client, not the introspecting client.
4. Populates response from the reassigned app and the grant.
There is no comparison between the introspecting client's id and grant.ApplicationID. The endpoint will return metadata for any token whose JWT signature validates, regardless of which client is asking.
Patch parity with PR #37704
The same file contains two recently-hardened handlers in commit 7e54514316 ("fix(oauth): bind token exchanges to the original client request", PR #37704, 2026-05-15) that added exactly this missing check:
handleRefreshToken (routers/web/auth/oauth2_provider.go:561-568):
```go
if grant.ApplicationID != app.ID {
handleAccessTokenError(ctx, oauth2_provider.AccessTokenError{
ErrorCode: oauth2_provider.AccessTokenErrorCodeInvalidGrant,
ErrorDescription: "refresh token belongs to a different client",
})
return
}
```
handleAuthorizationCode (routers/web/auth/oauth2_provider.go:640-647):
```go
if authorizationCode.RedirectURI != "" && form.RedirectURI != authorizationCode.RedirectURI {
handleAccessTokenError(ctx, oauth2_provider.AccessToke
How this vulnerability can be exploited
This issue can be reached over the network, attack complexity is low, an attacker needs low-level privileges on the target. No user interaction is required. The scope is unchanged, so the impact stays within the vulnerable component. Rated impact: confidentiality low, integrity none, availability none.
Weakness class
CVE-2026-58425 is classified as CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information. Information that should stay internal is disclosed to someone who is not authorised to see it.
Affected software
CVE-2026-58425 is recorded against 2 packages.
- code.gitea.io/gitea
- gitea.dev
Timeline and source
Published on 21 July 2026 and last revised on 27 July 2026. No public exploit is currently recorded for this entry. Record sourced from OSV.
References
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Package)
github.com (Web)
Details
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Affected Packages
| Software | From version | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| code.gitea.io/gitea | — | — |
| gitea.dev | — | — |
References
Similar Threats
- High CVE-2021-3382
- High CVE-2020-14144
- Medium CVE-2022-38183
- Medium CVE-2022-1928
- Unknown CVE-2019-1010261
More CVE 2026 advisories
Browse all of CVE 2026 in the advisory index.
Free Vulnerability Check
Is your site affected by CVE-2026-58425?
BotEraser helps you identify potentially vulnerable plugins and themes by checking your installation against CVE-2026-58425 and other known CVE records.
Scan My Site Free →No credit card required · Results in minutes
ⓘ Data Notice: The information presented above has been compiled from publicly available internet sources. Boteraser aggregates this data solely for informational purposes and does not independently classify, evaluate, or endorse any findings about the vulnerabilities listed. The accuracy and completeness of this information is the sole responsibility of the original publishers. Boteraser and its operators accept no liability for any decisions made based on this data.