UNITED STATES
                     SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                            WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

                                  FORM 10-K


  (Mark one)

  /X/ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
      EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007

      OR


  / / TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
      EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
      For the transition period from ____________ to ____________



      Commission file number of issuing entity: 333-139817-16

      GSAA Home Equity Trust 2007-8
      (exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)

      GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
      (exact name of the registrant (depositor) as specified in its charter)

      Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company
      (exact name of the sponsor as specified in its charter)



  New York                                54-2200254
  (State or other jurisdiction of         54-2200255
  incorporation or organization           54-2200275
  of issuing entity)                      54-2200276
                                          54-2200277
                                          54-6755316
                                          (I.R.S. Employer
                                          Identification No.
                                          of issuing entity)


   c/o Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
   9062 Old Annapolis Road
   Columbia, MD                                 21045
  (Address of principal executive               (Zip Code of
  offices of issuing entity)                    issuing entity)


 Telephone number, including area code of issuing entity: (410) 884-2000




  Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

    NONE.



  Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

    NONE.



  Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as
  defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

    Yes ___     No  X



  Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports
  pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

    Yes ___     No  X




  Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
  required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
  of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
  registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to
  such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

    Yes  X      No ___



  Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item
  405 of Regulation S-K (Section 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained
  herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in
  definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part
  III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.

    Not applicable.



  Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer,
  an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
  company.  See the definitions of "large accelerated filer", "accelerated
  filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

   Large accelerated filer ___
   Accelerated filer ___
   Non-accelerated filer X (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
   Smaller reporting company ___

  Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined
  in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

    Yes ___     No  X



  State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity
  held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the
  common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such
  common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant's most recently
  completed second fiscal quarter.

    Not applicable.



  DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

  See Item 15(a).



                                     PART I

  Item 1.      Business.

               Not applicable.


  Item 1A.     Risk Factors.

               Not applicable.


  Item 1B.     Unresolved Staff Comments.

               None.


  Item 2.      Properties.

               Not applicable.


  Item 3.      Legal Proceedings.

               Not applicable.


  Item 4.      Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

               Not applicable.




                                     PART II

  Item 5.      Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder
               Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

               Not applicable.


  Item 6.      Selected Financial Data.

               Not applicable.


  Item 7.      Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
               Results of Operation.

               Not applicable.


  Item 7A.     Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

               Not applicable.


  Item 8.      Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

               Not applicable.


  Item 9.      Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and
               Financial Disclosure.

               Not applicable.


  Item 9A.     Controls and Procedures.

               Not applicable.


  Item 9A(T).  Controls and Procedures.

               Not applicable.


  Item 9B.     Other Information.

               None.




                                    PART III

  Item 10.     Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

               Not applicable.


  Item 11.     Executive Compensation.

               Not applicable.


  Item 12.     Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
               and Related Stockholder Matters.

               Not applicable.


  Item 13.     Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
               Independence.

               Not applicable.


  Item 14.     Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

               Not applicable.




                    ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURE ITEMS FOR REGULATION AB


Item 1112(b) of Regulation AB, Significant Obligors of Pool Assets (Financial
Information).

No single obligor represents 10% or more of the pool assets held by the issuing
entity.



Item 1114(b)(2) of Regulation AB, Significant Enhancement  Provider Financial
Information.

No entity or group of affiliated entities provides any external credit
enhancement or other support for the certificates within this transaction as
described under Item 1114 (a) of Regulation AB.



Item 1115(b) of Regulation AB, Certain Derivatives Instruments (Financial
Information).

Goldman Sachs Mitsui Marine Derivative Products, L.P. provides two Interest Rate
Swap derivative instruments and an Interest Rate Cap instrument for the issuing
entity.  No additional disclosure is necessary because the aggregate
significance percentage for the Interest Swaps and Interest Cap is less than 10%



Item 1117 of Regulation AB, Legal Proceedings.

Legal Proceedings Regarding Fifth Third Mortgage Company

Pursuant to a Form 10-K filed by Fifth Third Bancorp ("FTB") on February 22,
2008 (Commission File No. 001-33653; CIK No. 0000035527), the parent of Fifth
Third Mortgage Company, one of the servicers and original loan sellers, FTB
stated that it filed suit in May 2005, in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Ohio in connection with a dispute with the Internal
Revenue Service concerning the timing of deductions associated with certain
leveraged lease transactions in its 1997 tax return. FTB stated that the
Internal Revenue Service has also proposed adjustments to the tax effects of
certain leveraged lease transactions in subsequent tax return years. FTB stated
that the proposed adjustments, including penalties, relate to FTB's portfolio of
lease-in lease-out transactions, service contract leases and qualified
technology equipment leases with both domestic and foreign municipalities. FTB
is challenging the Internal Revenue Service's proposed treatment of all of these
leasing transactions. FTB stated that its original net investment in these
leases totaled approximately $900 million. FTB stated that its management
continues to believe that its treatment of these leveraged leases was
appropriate and in compliance with applicable tax law and regulations. FTB
stated that while management cannot predict with certainty the result of the
suit, given the tax treatment of these transactions has been challenged by the
Internal Revenue Service, management believes a resolution may involve a
projected change in the timing of the leveraged lease cash flows. FTB stated
that under FSP FAS No. 13-2, which was effective as of January 1, 2007, a change
or projected change in the timing of lessor cash flows related to income taxes
generated by leveraged lease transactions, excluding interest and penalty
assessments, requires a lessor to recalculate the rate of return and allocation
of income to positive investment years from inception of the lease. FTB stated
that upon adoption of FSP FAS No. 13-2 on January 1, 2007, it recorded a $96
million after-tax charge to retained earnings related to its portfolio of
leveraged leases. FTB stated that the amount of this reduction will be
recognized as income over the remaining term of the affected leases. FTB
stated that during the first quarter of 2007, it made deposits of $386
million with the IRS to mitigate the risk associated with tax years currently
under audit. FTB stated that these deposits enable it to stop the accrual of
interest on any tax deficiency, to the extent of the deposit, if FTB is not
ultimately successful. FTB stated that trial for this litigation is
scheduled to begin March 31, 2008.

FTB stated that during April 2006, it was added as a defendant in a consolidated
antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa(R), MasterCard(R)
and several other major financial institutions in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York. FTB stated that the plaintiffs,
merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade
associations, claim that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks are
unreasonable and seek injunctive relief and unspecified damages. FTB stated that
in addition to being a named defendant, it is also subject to an indemnification
obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 14. Accordingly, FTB recorded a
contingent liability included in the $172 million litigation reserve.

FTB stated that several putative class action complaints have been filed against
it in various federal and state courts. FTB stated that the federal cases were
consolidated by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation and are now known
as "In Re TJX Security Breach Litigation." FTB stated that the state court
actions have been removed to federal court and have been consolidated into that
same case. FTB stated that the complaints relate to the alleged intrusion of The
TJX Companies, Inc.'s ("TJX") computer system and the potential theft of their
customers' non-public information and alleged violations of the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. FTB stated that some of the complaints were filed by
consumers and seek unquantified damages on behalf of putative classes of persons
who transacted business at any one of TJX's stores during the period of the
alleged intrusion. FTB stated that another complaint was filed by financial
institutions and seeks unquantified damages on behalf of other similarly
situated entities that suffered losses in relation to the alleged intrusion. FTB
stated that the U.S. District Court ("Court") has granted its motion to dismiss
certain of the claims, but additional claims remain pending. FTB stated that on
November 29, 2007, the U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts ("District
Court") issued an order denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification in
the consolidated cases brought by financial institutions (the "Financial
Institution Track"). FTB stated that on December 18, 2007, the District Court
entered its final order in the Financial Institution Track litigation that: (i)
denied Plaintiffs" Motion for Leave to Amend their Complaint, without prejudice;
(ii) dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; and (iii)
transferred the case from the United States District Court to the Massachusetts
Superior Court in and for the County of Middlesex ("Massachusetts State Court").
FTB stated that on December 18, 2007, TJX Companies, Inc. filed a notice of
Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ("First
Circuit") as to that portion of the Court's December 18 order transferring the
case to Massachusetts State Court and an emergency motion to stay the
Massachusetts State Court proceedings pending the appeal. FTB stated that on
December 19, 2007, the First Circuit granted the request for stay until further
order of the Court. FTB stated that on December 20, 2007, it likewise filed a
notice of appeal to the First Circuit solely as to that portion of the District
Court's December 18 Order transferring the case to the Massachusetts State
Court. FTB stated that on December 21, 2007, Plaintiffs also filed a Notice of
Appeal in the First Circuit as to the entirety of the District Court's December
18 Order and also as to all other prior "adverse rulings" including, without
limitation, the District Court's denial of class certification and dismissal
of various claims. FTB stated that in regard to the consumer track litigation,
on January 9, 2008, the District Court issued an Order of Preliminary Approval
of a proposed class action settlement funded solely by TJX and for the
Publishing of Notice of a Final Fairness Hearing set for July 15, 2008.

FTB stated that in June 2007, Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. ("Katz")
filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Ohio against FTB and its Ohio banking subsidiary. FTB stated that in the suit,
Katz alleges that FTB and its Ohio bank are infringing on Katz's patents for
interactive call processing technology by offering certain automated telephone
banking and other services. FTB stated that this lawsuit is one of many related
patent infringement suits brought by Katz in various courts against numerous
other defendants. FTB stated that Katz is seeking unspecified monetary damages
and penalties as well as injunctive relief in the suit. Management believes
there are substantial defenses to these claims and intends to defend them
vigorously. FTB stated that the impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit
cannot be assessed at this time.

FTB stated that in February 2008, a shareholder of FTB filed a derivative suit
in the Court of Common Pleas for Hamilton County, Ohio, against the members of
FTB's Board of Directors and, nominally, FTB, alleging breach of fiduciary duty
and waste of corporate assets, among other charges, in relation to the approval
of FTB's acquisition of First Charter Corporation. FTB stated that the suit
seeks an injunction to halt proceeding with the acquisition of First Charter
Corporation, an independent valuation of First Charter Corporation as to its
worth, unspecified compensatory damages in favor of FTB from the Directors as
well as costs and attorneys fees to the plaintiff. FTB stated that the impact of
the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time.

FTB stated that FTB and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material
litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal
course of business. FTB stated that while it is impossible to ascertain the
ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these
contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other
actions would not have a material effect upon it's consolidated financial
position or results of operations or cash flows.

Legal Proceedings Regarding National City Corporation

National City Mortgage Co., one of the servicers and original loan sellers, is
an indirect subsidiary of National City Corporation ("NCC").  Pursuant to a Form
10-K filed by NCC on February 13, 2008 (Commission File No. 001-10074; CIK No.
0000069970), NCC stated that it and its subsidiaries are involved in a number of
legal proceedings arising out of their businesses and regularly face various
claims, including unasserted claims, which may ultimately result in litigation.

NCC stated that these proceedings include claims brought against NCC and its
subsidiaries where NCC acted as depository bank, lender, underwriter, fiduciary,
financial advisor, broker, or other business activities and that reserves are
established for legal claims when losses associated with the claims are judged
to be probable, and the loss can be reasonably estimated.  NCC stated that in
many lawsuits and arbitrations, including almost all of the class action
lawsuits, it is not possible to determine whether a liability has been incurred
or to estimate the ultimate or minimum amount of that liability until the case
is close to resolution, in which case a reserve will not be recognized until
that time.

NCC stated that it and/or its subsidiaries were involved in the following legal
proceedings:

On or about November 22, 2002, a claim was asserted in the Marion County Probate
Court (Indiana) against National City Bank of Indiana, a subsidiary of NCC since
merged into National City Bank, concerning management of investments held in a
trust for the benefit of the Americans for the Arts and The Poetry Foundation.
The claim alleged failure to adequately and timely diversify investments held in
this trust, which resulted in investment losses.  The beneficiaries were seeking
damages of as much as $100 million.  In December 2005, the court entered an
order granting National City Bank of Indiana's motion for summary judgment, and
the beneficiaries filed an appeal.  On October 19, 2006, the Indiana Court of
Appeals, in a unanimous decision, affirmed the order granting National City Bank
of Indiana's motion for summary judgment.  By order dated March 8, 2007, the
Indiana Supreme Court unanimously denied the beneficiaries' motion to transfer
the appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court.  The beneficiaries have no further
appeals as a matter of right.

Beginning on June 22, 2005, a series of antitrust class action lawsuits were
filed against Visa(R), MasterCard(R), and several major financial institutions,
including eight cases naming NCC and its subsidiary, National City Bank of
Kentucky, since merged into National City Bank.  The plaintiffs, merchants
operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations,
claim that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks are unreasonable
and seek injunctive relief and unspecified damages.  The cases have been
consolidated for pretrial proceedings in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of New York. On July 1, 2007, NCC and National City Bank
entered into a Judgment Sharing Agreement (JSA) with respect to this litigation.
 This litigation is also subject to the Visa USA bylaws and the Loss Sharing
Agreement discussed in Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.  On
September 7, 2007, the Magistrate Judge recommended to the District Court that
all claims that predate January 1, 2004 should be dismissed.  Given the
preliminary stage of the remaining suits, it is not possible for management to
assess the probability of a material adverse outcome, or reasonably estimate the
amount of potential loss.

On March 31, 2006, NCC and National City Bank were served with a patent
infringement lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Texas. The plaintiff, Data Treasury Corporation, claims that NCC, as
well as over 50 other financial institutions or check processors, infringed on
its patents involving check imaging, storage and transfer.  The plaintiff seeks
damages and injunctive relief.  On January 6, 2006, the US Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) ordered a re-examination of certain of the patents (the Ballard
Patents) and the Court stayed the litigation as to those patents.  Subsequently,
the USPTO confirmed the patentability of all claims of the Ballard patents under
re-examination and the Plaintiff has now indicated its intention to ask the
court to lift the stay.  On or about July 27, 2007, the USPTO granted
re-examination of the other patents in suit (the Huntington Patents) and the
Court stayed the litigation as to those patents.  At this stage of this lawsuit,
it is not possible for management to assess the probability of a material
adverse outcome, or reasonably estimate the amount of potential loss.

On December 19, 2005, a class action suit was filed against National City
Mortgage Co. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
The lawsuit alleges that National City Mortgage loan originators were improperly
designated as exempt employees and seeks monetary damages.  On June 21, 2007,
the court conditionally certified an opt-in class of loan originators.  On
November 6, 2007, a settlement in principle was reached to resolve all wage and
hour claims of the loan originators employed during the class period that opt-in
to the settlement class.  This settlement is subject to court approval.  At
December 31, 2007, NCC has a $25 million reserve accrued for this matter.

On January 10 and January 17, 2008, two putative class action lawsuits were
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
against NCC, the Administrative Committee for the National City Savings and
Investment Plan and certain current and former officers and directors of NCC.
The complaints allege violations under of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA) relating to NCC's stock being offered as an investment
alternative for participants in the Plan.  The complaints seek unspecified money
damages and equitable relief.  At this stage of these lawsuits, it is not
possible for management to assess the probability of a material adverse outcome,
or reasonably estimate the amount of any potential loss.

On January 18 and January 28, 2008, two shareholder derivative complaints were
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
against certain current and former officers and directors of NCC alleging breach
of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment and violations
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  On February 6, 2008, two shareholder
derivative actions were filed in Chancery Court for the state of Delaware
against certain current and former officers and directors of NCC alleging breach
of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.  On February 11, 2008, a shareholder
derivative action was filed in Common Pleas Court in Cuyahoga County, Ohio
against certain current and former officers and directors of NCC alleging breach
of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.  All of these shareholder derivative
lawsuits make substantially identical allegations against substantially
identical parties. The complaints seek unspecified money damages and equitable
relief. At this stage of these lawsuits, it is not possible for management to
assess the probability of a material adverse outcome, or reasonably estimate the
amount of potential loss.

On January 24, 2008, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio against NCC and certain
current and former officers and directors of NCC.  The complaint alleges
violations of federal securities laws and seeks unspecified damages and
equitable relief on behalf of purchasers of the NCC's stock during the period
April 30, 2007 to January 2, 2008.  At this stage of the lawsuit, it is not
possible for management to assess the probability of a material adverse outcome,
or reasonably estimate the amount of any potential loss.

NCC stated that based on information currently available, consultation with
counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, management
believes that the eventual outcome of all claims against NCC and its
subsidiaries will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse
effect on consolidated financial position or results of operations.  NCC stated
that it is possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters, if
unfavorable, may be material to the results of operations for a particular
period.

NCC stated that it and its subsidiaries are involved in other administrative and
judicial proceedings brought by governmental or other regulatory agencies, and
the outcome of these proceedings could result in litigation, fines, penalties or
sanctions against NCC or its subsidiaries.  NCC stated that the most significant
proceedings were the following:

On October 11, 2006, Allegiant Asset Management Company (Allegiant), a
registered investment adviser and an indirect subsidiary of NCC, was notified
that the Pacific Regional Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
was conducting an examination concerning marketing arrangements Allegiant had
with entities that provide administrative services to the Allegiant Funds.  On
January 12, 2007, Allegiant submitted a written response to the SEC's inquiries
and subsequently provided follow-up written responses.  On November 9, 2007, NCC
was notified by the SEC that they have completed their investigation of this
matter.

On August 23, 2005, the Office of Inspector General issued its final audit
concerning late submitted requests to the Department of Housing and Urban
Development for FHA insurance made between May 1, 2002 and April 30, 2004 by
National City Mortgage Co., a subsidiary of National City Bank.  One of the
recommendations contained in the final audit was for a determination to be made
as to the legal sufficiency of possible remedies under the Program Fraud Civil
Remedies Act.  In late 2006, the Department of Housing and Urban Development
referred the matter to the Department of Justice's Civil Division to determine
if possible civil claims exist under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act and
the False Claims Act.  The Company is cooperating with the Department of Justice
in its civil claims investigation.  The nature and amount of any liabilities
that might arise from this investigation are not determinable at this time.



Item 1119 of Regulation AB, Affiliations and Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions.

The information regarding this Item has been previously disclosed in a 424(b)(5)
filed on July 31, 2007 (Commission File No. 333-139817-16).



Item 1122 of Regulation AB, Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria.

The reports on assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and the related attestation reports on such assessments
of compliance are attached hereto under Item 15(a).

Assurant, Inc. disclosed the following material noncompliance with the
servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d)(4)(xii) of Regulation AB
applicable to Assurant, Inc. during the year ended December 31, 2007. As
required by Item 1122(d)(4)(xii) of Regulation AB, any late payment penalties in
connection with any payment to be made on behalf of an obligor are paid from
the servicer's funds and are not charged to the obligor, unless the late payment
was due to the obligor's error or omission. Assurant, Inc. did not have, during
the Reporting Period, sufficient policies and procedures to capture the
information with respect to the Platform Transactions necessary to determine
compliance with 1122(d)(4)(xii).


Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. assessed its compliance with the Applicable Servicing
Criteria for the year ended December 31, 2007 and has identified the
following instances of non-compliance with the servicing criterion set forth
in Items 1122(d)(2)(vii)(D) and 1122(d)(4)(x)(C) of Regulation AB with
respect to the Platform (as defined in Avelo Mortgage L.L.C.'s report).
Specifically, account reconciling items were not resolved within 90
calendar days of their original identification, or such other number of
days specified in the transaction agreements, as required by
Item 1122(d)(2)(vii)(D)and Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. did not return to the
obligor funds held in trust for an obligor within 30 calendar days of full
repayment of the related pool asset, as required by Item 1122(d)(4)(x)(C).

Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. acknowledges that for a period in 2007, bank accounts
were not reconciled in strict compliance with Reg. AB. To address this
issue, Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. added additional staff to ensure timely
reconciliations and compliance with Reg AB. As of the date of the audit,
all bank account reconciliations were current. No issues were found or
arose from the delay in reconciling the bank accounts.

Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. also acknowledges that for a period in 2007, escrow
funds were not returned to the obligor within 30 calendar days of full
repayment in compliance with Reg. AB due to a system issue. A system
enhancement erroneously affected the refund check process. Once the issue
was identified, the system was corrected.

As of the date of the audit, escrow fund refunds have been returned to the
obligor within 30 calendar days and no issues were found or arose from the
delay in returning the funds to the account holders.



Item 1123 of Regulation AB, Servicer Compliance Statement.

The servicer compliance statements are attached hereto under Item 15(a).



                               Part IV

  Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.

  (a) Exhibits.

  (1) Not applicable.

  (2) Not applicable.

  (3)

  (4.1-10.9) Exhibits 4.1-10.9 were filed as part of the Registrant's Current
  Report on Form 8-K filed on August 14, 2007 (Commission File No.:
  333-139817-16) and are incorporated by reference herein.

  (4.1) Master Servicing and Trust Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2007, among
  GS Mortgage Securities Corp., as depositor, Citibank, N.A., as trustee,
  Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, U.S. Bank National Association and The
  Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association, each as a custodian
  and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as master servicer, securities
  administrator and as a custodian.

  (10.1) Interest Rate Swap Agreements, dated as of July 23, 2007 and July 24,
  2007, respectively, and Interest Rate Cap Agreement, dated as of July 23,
  2007, between GSAA Home Equity Trust 2007-8 and Goldman Sachs Mitsui Marine
  Derivative Products, L.P., with the respective Schedules and Confirmations
  thereto.

  (10.2) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
   2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
  and Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C.

  (10.3) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as ofJuly 30,
  2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C., Citibank,
  N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

  (10.4) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp. and
  Fifth Third Mortgage Company.

  (10.5) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., Fifth Third Mortgage Company,
  Citibank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

  (10.6) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp. and
  Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

  (10.7) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp, Wells Fargo Bank, National
  Association, Citibank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

  (10.8) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp. and
  National City Mortgage Co.

  (10.9) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July 30,
  2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp, Wells Fargo Bank, National
  Association, Citibank, N.A. and National City Mortgage Co.

  (31) Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

  (33) Reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
  asset-backed securities.


    <TABLE>
    
      <c>

    33.1 Assurant, Inc. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third
    Mortgage Company
    33.2 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    33.3 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Custodian
    33.4 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    33.5 First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo
    Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third Mortgage Company
    33.6 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    33.7 Regulus Group LLC as Sub-Contractor for National City Mortgage Co.
    33.8 The Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association as Custodian
    33.9 U.S. Bank National Association as Custodian
    33.10 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator
    33.11 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian

    </TABLE>


  (34) Attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
  for asset-backed securities.


    <TABLE>
    
      <c>

    34.1 Assurant, Inc. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third
    Mortgage Company
    34.2 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    34.3 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Custodian
    34.4 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    34.5 First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo
    Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third Mortgage Company
    34.6 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    34.7 Regulus Group LLC as Sub-Contractor for National City Mortgage Co.
    34.8 The Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association as Custodian
    34.9 U.S. Bank National Association as Custodian
    34.10 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator
    34.11 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian

    </TABLE>


   (35) Servicer compliance statement.


    <TABLE>
    
       <c>

    35.1 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    35.2 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    35.3 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    35.4 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator

    </TABLE>


   (b) See (a) above.

   (c) Not applicable.



                          SIGNATURES


  Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
  Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be
  signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.


   GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
   (Depositor)


   /s/ Michelle Gill
   Michelle Gill, Vice President
   (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)


    Date:   March 31, 2008



  Exhibit Index

  Exhibit No.


   (4.1-10.9) Exhibits 4.1-10.9 were filed as part of the Registrant's Current
   Report on Form 8-K filed on August 14, 2007 (Commission File No.:
   333-139817-16) and are incorporated by reference herein.

   (4.1) Master Servicing and Trust Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2007, among
   GS Mortgage Securities Corp., as depositor, Citibank, N.A., as trustee,
   Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, U.S. Bank National Association and
   The Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association, each as a
   custodian and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as master servicer,
   securities administrator and as a custodian.

   (10.1) Interest Rate Swap Agreements, dated as of July 23, 2007 and July 24,
    2007, respectively, and Interest Rate Cap Agreement, dated as of July 23,
   2007, between GSAA Home Equity Trust 2007-8 and Goldman Sachs Mitsui Marine
   Derivative Products, L.P., with the respective Schedules and Confirmations
   thereto.

   (10.2) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30, 2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
    and Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C.

   (10.3) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as ofJuly 30,
    2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C., Citibank,
    N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

   (10.4) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
   and Fifth Third Mortgage Company.

   (10.5) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp., Fifth Third Mortgage Company,
   Citibank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

   (10.6) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
   and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

   (10.7) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp, Wells Fargo Bank, National
   Association, Citibank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.

   (10.8) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, GS Mortgage Securities Corp.
   and National City Mortgage Co.

   (10.9) Assignment, Assumption and Recognition Agreement, dated as of July
   30,2007, among GS Mortgage Securities Corp, Wells Fargo Bank, National
   Association, Citibank, N.A. and National City Mortgage Co.

   (31) Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

   (33) Reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
   asset-backed securities.


    <TABLE>

    
      <c>
    33.1 Assurant, Inc. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third
    Mortgage Company
    33.2 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    33.3 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Custodian
    33.4 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    33.5 First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo
    Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third Mortgage Company
    33.6 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    33.7 Regulus Group LLC as Sub-Contractor for National City Mortgage Co.
    33.8 The Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association as Custodian
    33.9 U.S. Bank National Association as Custodian
    33.10 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator
    33.11 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian

    </TABLE>

   (34) Attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
   criteria for asset-backed securities.


    <TABLE>

    
      <c>
    34.1 Assurant, Inc. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third
    Mortgage Company
    34.2 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    34.3 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Custodian
    34.4 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    34.5 First American Real Estate Solutions of Texas, L.P. as Sub-Contractor for Avelo
    Mortgage, L.L.C. and Fifth Third Mortgage Company
    34.6 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    34.7 Regulus Group LLC as Sub-Contractor for National City Mortgage Co.
    34.8 The Bank of New York Trust Company, National Association as Custodian
    34.9 U.S. Bank National Association as Custodian
    34.10 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator
    34.11 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Custodian

    </TABLE>

   (35) Servicer compliance statement.


    <TABLE>

    
       <c>
    35.1 Avelo Mortgage, L.L.C. as Servicer
    35.2 Fifth Third Mortgage Company as Servicer
    35.3 National City Mortgage Co. as Servicer
    35.4 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Master Servicer and Securities Administrator

    </TABLE>