Skip to content

Gogs has an Authentication Bypass via Unvalidated Reverse Proxy Headers

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 19, 2026 in gogs/gogs • Updated Jun 22, 2026

Package

gomod gogs.io/gogs (Go)

Affected versions

<= 0.14.2

Patched versions

0.14.3

Description

Summary

When ENABLE_REVERSE_PROXY_AUTHENTICATION is enabled, Gogs accepts the configured authentication header (default: X-WEBAUTH-USER) directly from client requests without validating that the request originated from a trusted reverse proxy. Any remote attacker who can reach the Gogs service can forge this header to impersonate any user or trigger automatic account creation, completely bypassing authentication.

Root Cause

The vulnerability exists because Gogs reads the authentication header directly from the incoming HTTP request without any verification that the header was set by a trusted reverse proxy.

Vulnerable Code Flow

In internal/context/auth.go lines 206-234:

func authenticatedUser(store AuthStore, ctx *macaron.Context, sess session.Store) (_ *database.User, isBasicAuth, isTokenAuth bool) {
    // ... existing auth checks ...

    if uid <= 0 {
        if conf.Auth.EnableReverseProxyAuthentication {
            // Reads header DIRECTLY from client request - NO VALIDATION!
            webAuthUser := ctx.Req.Header.Get(conf.Auth.ReverseProxyAuthenticationHeader)
            if len(webAuthUser) > 0 {
                user, err := store.GetUserByUsername(ctx.Req.Context(), webAuthUser)
                if err != nil {
                    if !database.IsErrUserNotExist(err) {
                        log.Error("Failed to get user by name: %v", err)
                        return nil, false, false
                    }

                    // Check if enabled auto-registration.
                    if conf.Auth.EnableReverseProxyAutoRegistration {
                        // Creates new user with forged username!
                        user, err = store.CreateUser(
                            ctx.Req.Context(),
                            webAuthUser,
                            gouuid.NewV4().String()+"@localhost",
                            database.CreateUserOptions{
                                Activated: true,
                            },
                        )
                        if err != nil {
                            log.Error("Failed to create user %q: %v", webAuthUser, err)
                            return nil, false, false
                        }
                    }
                }
                // Returns user as authenticated without any verification!
                return user, false, false
            }
        }
        // ... fallback to basic auth ...
    }
    // ...
}

The code has zero validation that:

  1. The request came through a reverse proxy
  2. The header was set by the proxy (not the client)
  3. Gogs is actually behind a reverse proxy
  4. The direct access to Gogs is restricted

The vulnerability occurs when:

  • Gogs is publicly accessible (e.g., 0.0.0.0:3000)
  • ENABLE_REVERSE_PROXY_AUTHENTICATION = true

Proof of Concept

Prerequisites

Gogs instance with the following configuration in custom/conf/app.ini:

[auth]
ENABLE_REVERSE_PROXY_AUTHENTICATION = true

An attacker can impersonate any user including administrators:

# Become admin instantly
curl http://gogs.example.com/ -H "X-WEBAUTH-USER: <username>"

impersonation_example

Recommended Fixes

Add validation to ensure headers come from trusted sources:

func authenticatedUser(store AuthStore, ctx *macaron.Context, sess session.Store) (_ *database.User, isBasicAuth, isTokenAuth bool) {
    // ... existing code ...

    if uid <= 0 {
        if conf.Auth.EnableReverseProxyAuthentication {
            // Validate request is from trusted proxy
            if !isRequestFromTrustedProxy(ctx.Req) {
                log.Warn("Reverse proxy auth header received from untrusted source: %s", ctx.RemoteAddr())
                return nil, false, false
            }

            webAuthUser := ctx.Req.Header.Get(conf.Auth.ReverseProxyAuthenticationHeader)
            // ... rest of the code ...
        }
    }
    // ...
}

// New validation function
func isRequestFromTrustedProxy(req *http.Request) bool {
    // Check if request is from localhost/trusted IPs
    remoteIP := getRemoteIP(req)

    // Only accept from localhost by default
    if remoteIP.IsLoopback() {
        return true
    }

    // Check against configured trusted proxy IPs
    for _, trustedIP := range conf.Auth.TrustedProxyIPs {
        if remoteIP.String() == trustedIP {
            return true
        }
    }

    return false
}

Add configuration option:

[auth]
ENABLE_REVERSE_PROXY_AUTHENTICATION = false
REVERSE_PROXY_AUTHENTICATION_HEADER = X-WEBAUTH-USER
; Comma-separated list of trusted proxy IPs (default: 127.0.0.1)
TRUSTED_PROXY_IPS = 127.0.0.1,::1
; Whether to require trusted proxy validation (recommended: true)
REQUIRE_TRUSTED_PROXY = true

References

References

@unknwon unknwon published to gogs/gogs Jun 19, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 22, 2026
Reviewed Jun 22, 2026
Last updated Jun 22, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability None
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Authentication Bypass by Spoofing

This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-25119

GHSA ID

GHSA-w6j9-vw59-27wv

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.