Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

70% Positive

Analyzed from 840 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#github#forgejo#ghes#instance#enterprise#customers#upgrade#com#something#team

Discussion (35 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

jcimsabout 1 hour ago
Anyone in here work at Wiz? Seem like they do pretty good work. Tool itself has survived extreme growth/feature bloat and still does pretty well. Security team has found some really cool stuff.
bananapubabout 3 hours ago
> April 28, 2026

> GitHub Enterprise Server customers should upgrade immediately - at the time of this writing, our data indicates that 88% of instances are still vulnerable

> Upgrade to GHES version 3.19.3 or later

https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-server@3.19/admin/rele... :

> Enterprise Server 3.19.3 - March 10, 2026

88% of on-prem customers haven't applied a critical security fix from 7 weeks ago, that seems ... bad.

semiquaver18 minutes ago
GHES is essentially unmaintained (perhaps “on life support” would be more charitable since they are certainly accepting payment for it) and has been so for about a decade. It requires a multi-hour downtime to apply even a patch-level release. They do not have any supported mechanism for HA upgrades. So even the most conscientious GHES customers lag the latest version because they can’t afford the downtime.

They are constantly telling all their GHES customers who complain about the severe flaws with the self-hosted appliance product to move to GitHub Enterprise Cloud, which is just regular GitHub.com, but who in their right mind would make that move nowadays??? At least GHES stays up during the daily github.com outages.

baby_souffle12 minutes ago
You can at least schedule the updates.

It's still a pretty annoying process, though.

semiquaver9 minutes ago
Until GHES can do zero-downtime upgrades nothing will get better. Not on their roadmap because as far as I’m aware the GHES team doesn’t actually exist or is entirely focused on KLTO. It’s a dead product that they wish didn’t exist.
brianmcnultyabout 2 hours ago
I assume a fair amount of these on-prem customers restrict access to their GHES instance to be behind corporate VPN or something similar and are planning a date to upgrade their instance that won't affect operations.

Any public instance should update immediately though, it's not very hard to put together how to repro the vulnerability on your own from what they provide in the article and the fact that GitHub Enterprise source is publicly available.

bombcarabout 2 hours ago
If you're in the enterprise you can update something outside of the normal schedule and guarantee blow up everything (and be blamed) or you can stick with the schedule and hope for the best.

Guess which is usually picked ...

pixl97about 2 hours ago
Question is how fragile the upgrade process is in large installations. In other enterprise software messing around with large amounts of data I've seen the smallest things break the install and leaving the OPs team rolling back. Was like SharePoint in the past, you were rolling a dice when upgrading it.
chucky_zabout 2 hours ago
It's incredibly fragile. It breaks a vast majority of the time and takes multiple rounds of support on-call to upgrade typically.
formerly_provenabout 1 hour ago
Unsurprising for a fourth tier on-prem created by cutting a continuously deployed application into releases.
latchkeyabout 4 hours ago
People keep wanting to replace GitHub, but with what?

If GH is getting RCE's this late in the game who wants to take the chance something else won't?

skrrtwwabout 2 hours ago
A "reasonable" answer is probably a primary self-hosted Forgejo instance as the canonical forge, while using GitHub as a mirror solely to take advantage of its free CI, while that lasts, while hosting secrets with a dedicated secret-hosting provider (I don't know what the provider du jour for this is these days).
embedding-shapeabout 1 hour ago
> solely to take advantage of its free CI, while that lasts

Eh, if you want to be able to continue working, deploy and what not as normal during weekdays, I'd suggest also moving to Forgejo Actions if you're moving anyways. Not 100% compatible, but more or less the same, and even paying the same but with dedicated hardware you'd get way faster runners.

latchkeyabout 2 hours ago
Replace a whole 24/7 team of devops people with myself?

As much as I'd like to believe that I'm worthy, I'm not.

skrrtwwabout 2 hours ago
If the primary forge's only job is to host the actual Git infrastructure (the code, the MRs, the issues, maybe a wiki), it's a lot more simple than GitHub, and probably more within the scope of what people can reasonably administer themselves.
Caligatioabout 2 hours ago
I am personally now drawing a clear delineation between projects for my internal consumption (e.g. ansible scripts) and projects that have potential use for the general populace. For the prior, I now host a private Forgejo instance. For the latter, I'll put it on GitHub but mirror it to my Forgejo instance.

I was pleasantly shocked that Forgejo is literally a single binary with a relatively easy config. All my internal services reference my Forgejo instance so, if I need to bail on GitHub, it's low friction for me.

gtech1about 2 hours ago
GitLab ?
latchkeyabout 2 hours ago
The people who suggest gitlab, haven't used it. But I guess I could be tempted to try again...

https://status.gitlab.com/pages/history/5b36dc6502d06804c083...

chucky_zabout 2 hours ago
.... git?

replace it with git.

if you want a whole ui you can use something like forgejo which has far fewer features likely leading to less issues.

debugnikabout 2 hours ago
You probably meant Forgejo. Codeberg is a Forgejo instance exclusive for FOSS projects.
latchkeyabout 2 hours ago
i want what github offers.
heliumteraabout 2 hours ago
Enjoy your experience, there will certainly be no end to it.
halgerabout 1 hour ago
Woah I wonder if they can tell if this has been exploited or not
semiquaver27 minutes ago
My read is that this vulnerability is exploitable by an anonymous user. They absolutely have HTTP/gitprotocol logs that would indicate whether this was exploited but if it was, they won’t have logging about what actually got accessed and who did it, since the exploit was capable of standalone execution on the git servers, which would by definition be capable of evading any logging.
WASDxabout 1 hour ago
I was impressed enough by AI finding vulnerabilities in source code, but doing it in binary executables is just amazing. This has so much potential, good and bad.

And yet another lesson to not treat data as instructions. Sanitize all user input!

formerly_proven24 minutes ago
This is just such an amateur hour vulnerability. Gluing strings together with no regard to what might be in them and then parsing them later...
dang15 minutes ago
It's good to add information about what the vulnerability actually was, but please don't do it in the key of putdown. We're trying for something else here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

willworktill4pmabout 3 hours ago
GitHub case will be thought in schools how to screw up almost monopolistic position in the market in couple years. This is beyond bonkers.
hnlmorgabout 2 hours ago
Only if they take Skype off the syllabus first.
xaxfixhoabout 1 hour ago
private equity: hold my beer!