CVE-2021-43809
No source can show you its own past. This one can.
Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.
Local Code Execution through Argument Injection via dash leading git url parameter in Gemfile
rank 21 = 1 + 18 + 0 + 2 + 0
rank@v1 · backlog
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.02796 · without this subject the record ranks 20
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 7.3, from NVD · without this subject the record ranks 3
It is getting worse, not staying still
FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed
no persisting rise in 365 days · without this subject the record ranks 21
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
1 product in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 19
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 21
$140,000 = $4.99M incident cost x 1 exposure x 0.02796 likelihood
udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run
$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.
Hindsight · the state
Foresight · where to check next
This record is one instance of CWE-88, improper neutralization of argument delimiters in a command ('argument injection'). The index holds 456 prior instances of this class, 5 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. taxonomy@v1
Sources disagree here.
Both shown, dated. We don't pick winners. disagreement-rules@v1
Running rubygems? Check your version
A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.
Watch this record
Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.
Set up a watchlist (needs a Practitioner account)
Record your call
Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.
AcceptDeferPatch by…Not affectedMitigatedChoose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.
Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.
Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness
Written for the ticket you're about to file.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score
Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.
- RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
- RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
- RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
- RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known
A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.
Attack path
What it is stated by the CNA
`Bundler` is a package for managing application dependencies in Ruby. In `bundler` versions before 2.2.33, when working with untrusted and apparently harmless `Gemfile`'s, it is not expected that they lead to execution of external code, unless that's explicit in the ruby code inside the `Gemfile` itself. However, if the `Gemfile` includes `gem` entries that use the `git` option with invalid, but seemingly harmless, values with a leading dash, this can be false. To handle dependencies that come from a Git repository instead of a registry, Bundler uses various commands, such as `git clone`. These commands are being constructed using user input (e.g. the repository URL). receipt
Read the rest of the CNA's description
When building the commands, Bundler versions before 2.2.33 correctly avoid Command Injection vulnerabilities by passing an array of arguments instead of a command string. However, there is the possibility that a user input starts with a dash (`-`) and is therefore treated as an optional argument instead of a positional one. This can lead to Code Execution because some of the commands have options that can be leveraged to run arbitrary executables. Since this value comes from the `Gemfile` file, it can contain any character, including a leading dash. To exploit this vulnerability, an attacker has to craft a directory containing a `Gemfile` file that declares a dependency that is located in a Git repository. This dependency has to have a Git URL in the form of `-u./payload`. This URL will be used to construct a Git clone command but will be interpreted as the upload-pack argument. Then this directory needs to be shared with the victim, who then needs to run a command that evaluates the Gemfile, such as `bundle lock`, inside. This vulnerability can lead to Arbitrary Code Execution, which could potentially lead to the takeover of the system. However, the exploitability is very low, because it requires a lot of user interaction. Bundler 2.2.33 has patched this problem by inserting `--` as an argument before any positional arguments to those Git commands that were affected by this issue. Regardless of whether users can upgrade or not, they should review any untrustred `Gemfile`'s before running any `bundler` commands that may read them, since they can contain arbitrary ruby code.
NVD's analysis a second authority
- severity
- 7.3 CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
- weakness
- CWE-88
- affected versions
- bundler < 2.2.33
- also scored by
- [email protected] 6.7 CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
The CNA scored it 6.7 and NVD 7.3. Both are shown because both were published; we do not pick one.
check it yourself github.com github.com github.com github.com sonarsource.com receipt
Movement the material steps
This score more than doubled inside 72 hours. Both observations are in the full history below.
Show all 37 observations
37 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt
The full biography
Exploit probability more than doubled between 2025-11-18 and 2025-11-21 (0.00707 → 0.01777) and the record had been public for 4 years, 6 months when this index was last written.
The pattern, elsewhere
This record is one instance of CWE-88, improper neutralization of argument delimiters in a command ('argument injection'). The index holds 456 prior instances of this class, 5 KEV-listed. The nearest of its KEV-listed records are drawn beside this. [email protected]
"Matches n of m" counts the attributes the two records can both be compared on: the CVSS metrics they share a version of, any weakness class beyond this one, and the vendor. fit-rules@v1
456 records in this class held. The six above are drawn from the ones CISA has listed as exploited, ranked by how much of the record matches this one. That is why every one of them is KEV-listed: the pool is, so the colour on those spokes says nothing the pool has not already said.
No curated product neighbourhood is held for this product, so the records above are the nearest this index can name. The neighbourhood table covers a small set of products and is extended by hand.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2021-43809.
What usually comes next
Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.