Threats / GitLab / CVE-2021-22175
CVE-2021-22175
· EUVD no mirror located
· GCVE no mirror located
Verified 2026-08-04
GitLab vulnerability
GitLab contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in webhook functionality that allows attackers to make requests to internal network resources.
Verdict
Today item — known-exploited.
An SSRF flaw in GitLab's webhook implementation enables attackers to probe or access internal services and resources on the server's network, potentially leading to information disclosure or lateral movement within infrastructure.
CISA KEV Yes · 2026-02-185EPSS 0.53372 (verify live)6CVSS 6.83CISA SSVC Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Impact: total4Exploit Public PoC / detection · nuclei template12
01
Is it exploitable?
— the evidence, ranked above the scoreReported exploitation
3 independent public reports of in-the-wild exploitation are cataloged.Distinct reporting sources (vendor, incident response, government); open them for the underlying claims.
Exploited in the wild
Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog (added 2026-02-18).
Probability (EPSS)
EPSS 0.53372 — modeled likelihood of exploitation activity.EPSS is a daily-changing model output — open the source for today's value.
Severity / affected
CVSS 6.8 (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N) · Affected: GitLab, GitLab. Confirm exact fixed builds in the vendor advisory.CVSS — CNA-assigned (CVE.org), version 3.1, set at disclosure.
Weakness (CWE)
Mapped to CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF).CWE assignment from the public NVD record (may be stale); the weakness class drives how the flaw is exploited.
CISA SSVC (triage disposition)
Exploitation: active · Automatable: no · Technical Impact: totalCISA's own stakeholder-specific triage inputs, published in the CVE record (CISA Coordinator role). NOTE: this is CISA's three decision points; the final Act/Attend/Track decision also requires a Mission & Well-being input not published here, so no overall decision is asserted.
Currency of the record
CISA added this to its KEV catalog 1713 days after the CVE record was published.KEV lag = CISA-KEV dateAdded − CVE.org datePublished; a floor on how long the known-exploited flaw sat in the public record before the federal catalog listed it. Severity/weakness here is CNA- or CISA-assigned (current at disclosure), independent of NVD's analysis backlog.
Public exploit available
Public exploit tooling is catalogued for this CVE (a public proof-of-concept / detection template). Catalog entries: nuclei template. We link the catalog page(s) only — no payload or code is hosted or restated here.Link, never host — the catalog page is the source; basicsecurity.net does not redistribute payloads.
02
Who’s exploiting it?
— attribution turns risk into urgencyAttribution not established
No confirmed (advisory-backed) threat-actor attribution is established for this record. Absence of a named actor is not absence of compromise — see Coverage & confidence.
03
Why it matters
— the attack path, told twice: adversary, then board1
Front door — unauthenticated access narrative 1
Attacker
I craft a malicious webhook URL pointing to an internal network resource or service.
Business
Internal services and network topology become exposed to reconnaissance and potential compromise.
2
Keys to the kingdom — privilege/identity takeover narrative 2
Attacker
I trigger webhook execution to force the GitLab server to make requests to internal addresses I specify.
Business
Attackers gain unauthorized access to internal APIs, databases, or administrative interfaces not exposed externally.
3
Lateral reach — past segmentation narrative 3
Attacker
I enumerate internal services and extract sensitive data or credentials from responses.
Business
Confidential information and authentication tokens are leaked, enabling further system compromise.
04
What to do
— defensible action- Remediate per the vendor advisory — confirm the fixed build for your version and verify exposure.1
Say it to the boardA vulnerability with this evidence profile is a defensible budget line, not a backlog ticket — fund the change against the proof above.
05