Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-22

Weakness Allowed-with-Review

Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory

Abstraction: Base · Status: Stable

The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.

Many file operations are intended to take place within a restricted directory. By using special elements such as ".." and "/" separators, attackers can escape outside of the restricted location to access files or directories that are elsewhere on the system. One of the most common special elements is the "../" sequence, which in most modern operating systems is interpreted as the parent directory of the current location. This is referred to as relative path traversal. Path traversal also covers the use of absolute pathnames such as "/usr/local/bin" to access unexpected files. This is referred to as absolute path traversal.

Mapping guidance

This CWE entry might have children that would be more appropriate.

Examine children of this entry to see if there is a better fit. Consider children such as CWE-23 (or its descendants) for relative path traversal, or CWE-36 for absolute path traversal.

Relationships and members
ChildOf: CWE-706 · View CWE-1000
ChildOf: CWE-706 · View CWE-1003
CanPrecede: CWE-668 · View CWE-1000
Modes of introduction
Implementation
Detection methods

Automated Static Analysis

Automated techniques can find areas where path traversal weaknesses exist. However, tuning or customization may be required to remove or de-prioritize path-traversal problems that are only exploitable by the product's administrator - or other privileged users - and thus potentially valid behavior or, at worst, a bug instead of a vulnerability.

Effectiveness: High

Manual Static Analysis

Manual white box techniques may be able to provide sufficient code coverage and reduction of false positives if all file access operations can be assessed within limited time constraints.

Effectiveness: High

Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis

Effectiveness: High

Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies

Effectiveness: SOAR Partial

Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Web Application Scanner

Web Services Scanner

Database Scanners

Effectiveness: High

Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Fuzz Tester

Framework-based Fuzzer

Effectiveness: High

Manual Static Analysis - Source Code

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source

Effectiveness: High

Automated Static Analysis - Source Code

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Source code Weakness Analyzer

Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer

Effectiveness: High

Architecture or Design Review

According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:

Highly cost effective:

Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction

Cost effective for partial coverage:

Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)

Effectiveness: High

Notes

Other

In many programming languages, the injection of a null byte (the 0 or NUL) may allow an attacker to truncate a generated filename to apply to a wider range of files. For example, the product may add ".txt" to any pathname, thus limiting the attacker to text files, but a null injection may effectively remove this restriction.

Relationship

Pathname equivalence can be regarded as a type of canonicalization error.

Relationship

Some pathname equivalence issues are not directly related to directory traversal, rather are used to bypass security-relevant checks for whether a file/directory can be accessed by the attacker (e.g. a trailing "/" on a filename could bypass access rules that don't expect a trailing /, causing a server to provide the file when it normally would not).

Terminology

Like other weaknesses, terminology is often based on the types of manipulations used, instead of the underlying weaknesses. Some people use "directory traversal" only to refer to the injection of ".." and equivalent sequences whose specific meaning is to traverse directories.

Other variants like "absolute pathname" and "drive letter" have the *effect* of directory traversal, but some people may not call it such, since it doesn't involve ".." or equivalent.

Research Gap

Many variants of path traversal attacks are probably under-studied with respect to root cause. CWE-790 and CWE-182 begin to cover part of this gap.

Research Gap

Incomplete diagnosis or reporting of vulnerabilities can make it difficult to know which variant is affected. For example, a researcher might say that "..\" is vulnerable, but not test "../" which may also be vulnerable.

Any combination of directory separators ("/", "\", etc.) and numbers of "." (e.g. "....") can produce unique variants; for example, the "//../" variant is not listed (CVE-2004-0325). See this entry's children and lower-level descendants.

Content history
Submission: PLOVER · 2006-07-19 · CWE Draft 3
Contribution: Nick Johnston · 2022-07-11 · CWE 4.9

Identified weakness in Perl demonstrative example

Contribution: Abhi Balakrishnan · 2024-02-29 · CWE 4.15

Provided diagram to improve CWE usability

Contribution: Drew Buttner · MITRE · 2024-11-01 · CWE 4.16

Identified weakness in "good code" for Python demonstrative example

Contribution: Affan Ahmed · 2025-02-08 · CWE 4.20

Provided a demonstrative example in PHP

Modification: Eric Dalci · Cigital · 2008-07-01 · CWE 1.0

updated Potential_Mitigations, Time_of_Introduction

Modification: · Veracode · 2008-08-15 · CWE 1.0

Suggested OWASP Top Ten 2004 mapping

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2008-09-08 · CWE 1.0

updated Alternate_Terms, Relationships, Other_Notes, Relationship_Notes, Relevant_Properties, Taxonomy_Mappings, Weakness_Ordinalities

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2008-10-14 · CWE 1.0.1

updated Description

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2008-11-24 · CWE 1.1

updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2009-07-27 · CWE 1.5

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-02-16 · CWE 1.8

updated Alternate_Terms, Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Detection_Factors, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Name, Observed_Examples, Other_Notes, Potential_Mitigations, References, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationship_Notes, Relationships, Research_Gaps, Taxonomy_Mappings, Terminology_Notes, Time_of_Introduction, Weakness_Ordinalities

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-06-21 · CWE 1.9

updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-09-27 · CWE 1.10

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2010-12-13 · CWE 1.11

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-03-29 · CWE 1.12

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-06-27 · CWE 2.0

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2011-09-13 · CWE 2.1

updated Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2012-05-11 · CWE 2.2

updated Demonstrative_Examples, References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2012-10-30 · CWE 2.3

updated Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2013-02-21 · CWE 2.4

updated Observed_Examples

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2013-07-17 · CWE 2.5

updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2014-06-23 · CWE 2.7

updated Other_Notes, Research_Gaps

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2014-07-30 · CWE 2.8

updated Detection_Factors, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2015-12-07 · CWE 2.9

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2017-01-19 · CWE 2.10

updated Related_Attack_Patterns

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2017-05-03 · CWE 2.11

updated Demonstrative_Examples

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2017-11-08 · CWE 3.0

updated Affected_Resources, Causal_Nature, Likelihood_of_Exploit, References, Relationships, Relevant_Properties, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2018-03-27 · CWE 3.1

updated References, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2019-01-03 · CWE 3.2

updated References, Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2019-06-20 · CWE 3.3

updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships, Type

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2019-09-19 · CWE 3.4

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-02-24 · CWE 4.0

updated Potential_Mitigations, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-06-25 · CWE 4.1

updated Demonstrative_Examples, Potential_Mitigations

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-08-20 · CWE 4.2

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2020-12-10 · CWE 4.3

updated Potential_Mitigations, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2021-03-15 · CWE 4.4

updated Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2021-07-20 · CWE 4.5

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2021-10-28 · CWE 4.6

updated Observed_Examples, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2022-06-28 · CWE 4.8

updated Observed_Examples, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2022-10-13 · CWE 4.9

updated Observed_Examples, References

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-01-31 · CWE 4.10

updated Common_Consequences, Description, Detection_Factors

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-04-27 · CWE 4.11

updated Demonstrative_Examples, References, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-06-29 · CWE 4.12

updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2023-10-26 · CWE 4.13

updated Observed_Examples

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2024-07-16 · CWE 4.15

updated Common_Consequences, Description, Diagram, Observed_Examples, Other_Notes, References

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2024-11-19 · CWE 4.16

updated Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-04-03 · CWE 4.17

updated Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-09-09 · CWE 4.18

updated Applicable_Platforms, Detection_Factors, Observed_Examples, Potential_Mitigations, References

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2025-12-11 · CWE 4.19

updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2026-04-30 · CWE 4.20

updated Alternate_Terms, Applicable_Platforms, Demonstrative_Examples, Relationships

Modification: CWE Content Team · MITRE · 2026-10-28 · CWE 5.0

updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Name, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings

16153 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-CW29-QGM5-WVQC

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:28 – Updated: 2025-04-12 12:42
VLAI
Details

Directory traversal vulnerability in the dp_img_resize function in php/dp-functions.php in the DukaPress plugin before 2.5.4 for WordPress allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the src parameter to lib/dp_image.php.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2014-8799"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2014-11-28T15:59:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in the dp_img_resize function in php/dp-functions.php in the DukaPress plugin before 2.5.4 for WordPress allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the src parameter to lib/dp_image.php.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw29-qgm5-wvqc",
  "modified": "2025-04-12T12:42:25Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:28:41Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2014-8799"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/98943"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/1024640/dukapress"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://wordpress.org/plugins/dukapress/changelog"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://security.szurek.pl/dukapress-252-path-traversal.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/35346"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-CW2G-2VWQ-88W6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-11-09 20:13 – Updated: 2026-11-09 20:13
VLAI
Summary
isomorphic-git: Path traversal via a ".." tree-entry name writes files outside the working directory on clone/checkout
Details

Summary

isomorphic-git's tree parser (src/models/GitTree.js) validates each entry name only against the path separators / and \. It does not reject the standalone reserved name .., so a malicious repository can, on a single clone/checkout, write files outside the working directory (unbounded depth). Works on any host-backed fs provider.

Details

The guard is:

// src/models/GitTree.js
if (path.includes('\\') || path.includes('/')) {
  throw new UnsafeFilepathError(path)
}

The standalone string .. passes. isomorphic-git assembles the full path incrementally across tree levels, so nesting .. trees yields ../escaped.txt, ../../escaped.txt, … with unbounded depth (each level is a separate tree object that passes the per-entry guard). On checkout mkdir(workdir/..) hits EEXIST (ignored) and the file is written above the working directory. Depth is chosen to reach the home dir, /etc, /tmp, etc.; overwriting a shell rc / config / startup file can escalate to code execution.

Canonical git behavior (divergence)

git rejects this via verify_path(): git read-tree fails with error: invalid path '../escaped.txt' and git fsck flags warning … hasDotdot: contains '..'. (git's verify_path also rejects . and .git, the latter flagged by fsck as hasDotgit — see the fix note below.) GitHub runs fsck on push, so such a tree can't be hosted there; reach is limited to a self-hosted/Smart-HTTP remote or a MitM.

PoC

https://github.com/spiceoverflow/av2-dotdot-traversal — open in a Codespace; a single git.clone() from the bundled server writes escaped.txt one directory above the clone target (DEPTH=N escapes N levels):

[AV-2] *** PATH TRAVERSAL CONFIRMED ***
[AV-2] File written outside workdir: …/escaped.txt

Impact

A path-traversal arbitrary file write outside the working directory (CWE-22), triggered by a single clone/checkout; it can escalate to code execution by overwriting shell rc, config, or startup files.

Any application or user that clones/checks out an untrusted (or compromised / MitM'd) repository with isomorphic-git on a host-backed filesystem (Linux, macOS, or Windows — no symlink or privilege required). Requires a non-GitHub remote (self-hosted / Smart-HTTP) or a MitM, since GitHub's fsck rejects trees containing ...

Suggested fix

In the tree parser, reject any entry name equal to . or ... For full verify_path parity it should also reject .git (case-insensitively, trailing dots/spaces stripped) and the NTFS 8.3 / HFS variants git blocks. Note: a literal .git entry is not independently exploitable via clone/checkout in current isomorphic-git — the checkout walk skips a .git tree entry (a sibling file is written but the .git entry is not), so rejecting .git is defense-in-depth / git parity rather than a separately demonstrated bug. Additionally, normalize and bounds-check the assembled full path against the working-tree root before any filesystem write.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.38.5"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "isomorphic-git"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.38.6"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-63478"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-11-09T20:13:52Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-11-03T20:18:16Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nisomorphic-git\u0027s tree parser (`src/models/GitTree.js`) validates each entry name only against the path separators `/` and `\\`. It does not reject the standalone reserved name `..`, so a malicious repository can, on a single `clone`/`checkout`, **write files outside the working\ndirectory** (unbounded depth). Works on any host-backed `fs` provider.\n\n### Details\nThe guard is:\n\n```js\n// src/models/GitTree.js\nif (path.includes(\u0027\\\\\u0027) || path.includes(\u0027/\u0027)) {\n  throw new UnsafeFilepathError(path)\n}\n```\n\nThe standalone string `..` passes. isomorphic-git assembles the full path incrementally across tree levels, so nesting `..` trees yields `../escaped.txt`, `../../escaped.txt`, \u2026 with unbounded depth (each level is a separate tree object that passes the per-entry guard). On checkout `mkdir(workdir/..)` hits `EEXIST` (ignored) and the file is written above the working directory. Depth is chosen to reach the home dir, `/etc`, `/tmp`, etc.; overwriting a shell rc / config / startup file can escalate to code execution.\n\n#### Canonical git behavior (divergence)\ngit rejects this via `verify_path()`: `git read-tree` fails with `error: invalid path \u0027../escaped.txt\u0027` and `git fsck` flags `warning \u2026 hasDotdot: contains \u0027..\u0027`. (git\u0027s `verify_path` also rejects `.` and `.git`, the latter flagged by fsck as `hasDotgit` \u2014 see the fix note below.) GitHub runs fsck on push, so such a tree can\u0027t be hosted there; reach is limited to a self-hosted/Smart-HTTP remote or a MitM.\n\n\n### PoC\n`https://github.com/spiceoverflow/av2-dotdot-traversal` \u2014 open in a Codespace; a single `git.clone()` from the bundled server writes `escaped.txt` one directory above the clone target (`DEPTH=N` escapes N levels):\n\n```\n[AV-2] *** PATH TRAVERSAL CONFIRMED ***\n[AV-2] File written outside workdir: \u2026/escaped.txt\n```\n\n### Impact\nA path-traversal arbitrary file write outside the working directory (CWE-22), triggered by a single clone/checkout; it can escalate to code execution by overwriting shell rc, config, or startup files.\n\nAny application or user that clones/checks out an untrusted (or compromised / MitM\u0027d) repository with isomorphic-git on a host-backed filesystem (**Linux, macOS, or Windows** \u2014 no symlink or privilege required). Requires a non-GitHub remote (self-hosted / Smart-HTTP) or a MitM, since GitHub\u0027s fsck rejects trees containing `..`.\n\n### Suggested fix\nIn the tree parser, reject any entry name equal to `.` or `..`. For full `verify_path` parity it should **also** reject `.git` (case-insensitively, trailing dots/spaces stripped) and the NTFS 8.3 / HFS variants git blocks. Note: a literal `.git` entry is *not* independently exploitable via\n`clone`/`checkout` in current isomorphic-git \u2014 the checkout walk skips a `.git` tree entry (a sibling file is written but the `.git` entry is not), so rejecting `.git` is defense-in-depth / git parity rather than a separately demonstrated bug. Additionally, normalize and bounds-check the assembled full path against the working-tree root before any filesystem write.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw2g-2vwq-88w6",
  "modified": "2026-11-09T20:13:52Z",
  "published": "2026-11-09T20:13:52Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/isomorphic-git/isomorphic-git/security/advisories/GHSA-cw2g-2vwq-88w6"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-63478"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/isomorphic-git/isomorphic-git/pull/2370"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/isomorphic-git/isomorphic-git/commit/823843d1cd19182df79bc907c767f5bcecb39a0b"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/isomorphic-git/isomorphic-git"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/isomorphic-git/isomorphic-git/releases/tag/v1.38.6"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "isomorphic-git: Path traversal via a \"..\" tree-entry name writes files outside the working directory on clone/checkout"
}

GHSA-CW2M-PP37-H7M6

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:23 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:46
VLAI
Details

Directory traversal vulnerability in Cybele Software Thinfinity Remote Desktop Workstation 3.0.0.3 32-bit and 64-bit allows remote attackers to download arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in an unspecified parameter.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2015-1429"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2017-10-06T22:29:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in Cybele Software Thinfinity Remote Desktop Workstation 3.0.0.3 32-bit and 64-bit allows remote attackers to download arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in an unspecified parameter.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw2m-pp37-h7m6",
  "modified": "2025-04-20T03:46:26Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:23:14Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-1429"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.perspectiverisk.com/security-advisory-thinfinity-remote-desktop-workstation-directory-traversal"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.cybelesoft.com/blog/index.php/cybele-software-inc-security-bulletin-2"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CW3G-MJRP-G48Q

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-29 18:30 – Updated: 2026-01-20 21:31
VLAI
Details

MapTiler Tileserver-php v2.0 is vulnerable to Directory Traversal. The renderTile function within tileserver.php is responsible for delivering tiles that are stored as files on the server via web request. Creating the path to a file allows the insertion of "../" and thus read any file on the web server. Affected GET parameters are "TileMatrix", "TileRow", "TileCol" and "Format"

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-44137"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-07-29T17:15:33Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "MapTiler Tileserver-php v2.0 is vulnerable to Directory Traversal. The renderTile function within tileserver.php is responsible for delivering tiles that are stored as files on the server via web request. Creating the path to a file allows the insertion of \"../\" and thus read any file on the web server. Affected GET parameters are \"TileMatrix\", \"TileRow\", \"TileCol\" and \"Format\"",
  "id": "GHSA-cw3g-mjrp-g48q",
  "modified": "2026-01-20T21:31:30Z",
  "published": "2025-07-29T18:30:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-44137"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/maptiler/tileserver-php/issues/167"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/maptiler/tileserver-php/commit/4fe14e6164bbe2a3f9e3b3d7acf303e3ec210c8e"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/mheranco/CVE-2025-44137"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CW45-5QRW-CF7X

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-03-06 09:30 – Updated: 2023-03-11 03:30
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in fastcms. This affects an unknown part of the file admin/TemplateController.java of the component ZIP File Handler. The manipulation leads to path traversal. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-222363.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-1191"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2023-03-06T08:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in fastcms. This affects an unknown part of the file admin/TemplateController.java of the component ZIP File Handler. The manipulation leads to path traversal. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-222363.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw45-5qrw-cf7x",
  "modified": "2023-03-11T03:30:18Z",
  "published": "2023-03-06T09:30:17Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1191"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/my-fastcms/fastcms/issues/1"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ha1yuYiqiyinHangzhouTechn0logy/fastcms/blob/main/README.md"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.222363"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.222363"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CW5H-X3X9-4MWP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-26 15:31 – Updated: 2026-09-26 15:31
VLAI
Details

GitPython before 3.1.62 does not validate the path field read from an untrusted .gitmodules file when updating submodules. While a prior fix (GHSA-hmq2-w58f-27jc) added Submodule._validated_name() to constrain the name field, and GitPython's own containment guard Submodule._to_relative_path() is applied in add() and move(), Submodule.update() derives the absolute checkout location from the raw path value without that guard. A .gitmodules entry containing directory traversal components (e.g., path = ../../../tmp/escaped) can therefore cause directories to be created via os.makedirs() outside the repository working tree, populated from the submodule URL on the clone path, and removed via shutil.rmtree() when force_remove is used. Exploitation requires an application flow that updates submodules at a non-HEAD commit (such as a historical-commit API); the common clone-then-update flow re-derives the path from a canonical tree lookup and is not affected. The issue is fixed in GitPython 3.1.62.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-100689"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-26T14:16:53Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "GitPython before 3.1.62 does not validate the `path` field read from an untrusted .gitmodules file when updating submodules. While a prior fix (GHSA-hmq2-w58f-27jc) added Submodule._validated_name() to constrain the `name` field, and GitPython\u0027s own containment guard Submodule._to_relative_path() is applied in add() and move(), Submodule.update() derives the absolute checkout location from the raw `path` value without that guard. A .gitmodules entry containing directory traversal components (e.g., path = ../../../tmp/escaped) can therefore cause directories to be created via os.makedirs() outside the repository working tree, populated from the submodule URL on the clone path, and removed via shutil.rmtree() when force_remove is used. Exploitation requires an application flow that updates submodules at a non-HEAD commit (such as a historical-commit API); the common clone-then-update flow re-derives the path from a canonical tree lookup and is not affected. The issue is fixed in GitPython 3.1.62.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw5h-x3x9-4mwp",
  "modified": "2026-09-26T15:31:21Z",
  "published": "2026-09-26T15:31:21Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/security/advisories/GHSA-59cr-6r3x-644w"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-100689"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/gitpython-before-3.1.62-path-traversal-via-gitmodules-path"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-CW5R-JX8R-9F7X

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-05-24 18:52 – Updated: 2024-11-07 19:20
VLAI
Summary
Jenkins Report Info Plugin Path Traversal vulnerability
Details

Jenkins Report Info Plugin 1.2 and earlier does not perform path validation of the workspace directory while serving report files.

Additionally, Report Info Plugin does not support distributed builds.

This results in a path traversal vulnerability, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to retrieve Surefire failures, PMD violations, Findbugs bugs, and Checkstyle errors on the controller file system by editing the workspace path.

As of publication of this advisory, there is no fix.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Maven",
        "name": "org.jenkins-ci.plugins:report-info"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "last_affected": "1.2"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-5273"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-05-24T18:52:08Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-05-24T14:15:17Z",
    "severity": "LOW"
  },
  "details": "Jenkins Report Info Plugin 1.2 and earlier does not perform path validation of the workspace directory while serving report files.\n\nAdditionally, Report Info Plugin does not support distributed builds.\n\nThis results in a path traversal vulnerability, allowing attackers with Item/Configure permission to retrieve Surefire failures, PMD violations, Findbugs bugs, and Checkstyle errors on the controller file system by editing the workspace path.\n\nAs of publication of this advisory, there is no fix.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw5r-jx8r-9f7x",
  "modified": "2024-11-07T19:20:34Z",
  "published": "2024-05-24T18:52:08Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-5273"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/report-info-plugin"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2024-05-24/#SECURITY-3070"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/05/24/2"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Jenkins Report Info Plugin Path Traversal vulnerability"
}

GHSA-CW6G-QMJQ-6W2W

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-13 14:15 – Updated: 2024-11-13 18:58
VLAI
Summary
Craft CMS Arbitrary System File Read
Details

Summary

By abusing the mail notification template it is possible to read arbitrary operating system files.

Details

The dataUrl function can be exploited if an attacker has write permissions on system notification templates. This function accepts an absolute file path, reads the file's content, and converts it into a Base64-encoded string. By embedding this function within a system notification template, the attacker can exfiltrate the Base64-encoded file content through a triggered system email notification. Once the email is received, the Base64 payload can be decoded, allowing the attacker to read arbitrary files on the server.

Requirements: * write permissions to system notification templates * ability to trigger a corresponding system email

PoC

1) Modify a template to contain the following twig template string:

{{ dataUrl('/var/www/web/.env') }}

2) Trigger the corresponding notification email (e.g. by resetting a password) 3) Receive the email and decode the base64 string

Mail received: Bildschirmfoto 2024-09-05 um 16 20 41

Decoded string: Bildschirmfoto 2024-09-05 um 16 28 24

Impact

1) Exposure of Sensitive Information: Arbitrary file read can lead to the exposure of sensitive data such as configuration files (e.g., /etc/passwd, .env, config.php), which may contain credentials, API keys, or database passwords. This can provide the attacker with further access to the system or connected services.

2) Privilege Escalation: If the attacker is able to read files that contain privileged information, such as credentials for other systems or applications, they may be able to escalate their privileges beyond what the web admin role originally allowed, potentially gaining full control over the server or other related systems.

3) Server Compromise: Access to files like SSH keys, private certificates, or system configuration files can lead to the complete compromise of the underlying server. With this information, an attacker could remotely log in to the server or impersonate it in secure communications.

4) Exfiltration of User Data: The ability to read arbitrary files may allow an attacker to access user data, such as stored passwords, session tokens, or private information (like uploaded files or logs), leading to a breach of confidentiality and violating privacy regulations (e.g., GDPR).

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 5.4.7.1"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "craftcms/cms"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "5.0.0-alpha.1"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "5.4.9"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.12.6.1"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Packagist",
        "name": "craftcms/cms"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "3.5.13"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "4.12.8"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-52292"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22",
      "CWE-552"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2024-11-13T14:15:39Z",
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-13T17:15:12Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nBy abusing the mail notification template it is possible to read arbitrary operating system files. \n\n### Details\nThe [dataUrl](https://craftcms.com/docs/3.x/dev/functions.html#dataurl) function can be exploited if an attacker has write permissions on system notification templates. This function accepts an absolute file path, reads the file\u0027s content, and converts it into a Base64-encoded string. By embedding this function within a system notification template, the attacker can exfiltrate the Base64-encoded file content through a triggered system email notification. Once the email is received, the Base64 payload can be decoded, allowing the attacker to read arbitrary files on the server.\n\nRequirements:\n* write permissions to system notification templates\n* ability to trigger a corresponding system email\n\n### PoC\n1) Modify a template to contain the following twig template string:\n```twig\n{{ dataUrl(\u0027/var/www/web/.env\u0027) }}\n```\n2) Trigger the corresponding notification email (e.g. by resetting a password)\n3) Receive the email and decode the base64 string\n\nMail received:\n![Bildschirmfoto 2024-09-05 um 16 20 41](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/24dc5196-6847-4006-b7ef-8cd10d659c30)\n\nDecoded string:\n![Bildschirmfoto 2024-09-05 um 16 28 24](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1913a475-5277-49b9-9210-2f3fcd3b9bf1)\n\n\n### Impact\n1) Exposure of Sensitive Information: Arbitrary file read can lead to the exposure of sensitive data such as configuration files (e.g., /etc/passwd, .env, config.php), which may contain credentials, API keys, or database passwords. This can provide the attacker with further access to the system or connected services.\n\n2) Privilege Escalation: If the attacker is able to read files that contain privileged information, such as credentials for other systems or applications, they may be able to escalate their privileges beyond what the web admin role originally allowed, potentially gaining full control over the server or other related systems.\n\n3) Server Compromise: Access to files like SSH keys, private certificates, or system configuration files can lead to the complete compromise of the underlying server. With this information, an attacker could remotely log in to the server or impersonate it in secure communications.\n\n4) Exfiltration of User Data: The ability to read arbitrary files may allow an attacker to access user data, such as stored passwords, session tokens, or private information (like uploaded files or logs), leading to a breach of confidentiality and violating privacy regulations (e.g., GDPR).\n",
  "id": "GHSA-cw6g-qmjq-6w2w",
  "modified": "2024-11-13T18:58:35Z",
  "published": "2024-11-13T14:15:39Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/craftcms/cms/security/advisories/GHSA-cw6g-qmjq-6w2w"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-52292"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/craftcms/cms"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:P",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Craft CMS Arbitrary System File Read"
}

GHSA-CW6H-FFMH-X6VH

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-19 22:10 – Updated: 2026-06-19 22:10
VLAI
Summary
Anki: User scripts in iframes have access to the internal Anki API
Details

Summary

Anki's webview-based pages communicate with the Rust backend using an internal localhost API. Anki implements measures to prevent user scripts run in the reviewer/editor from accessing this API (https://github.com/ankitects/anki/pull/3925) but it inadvertently allows access to scripts included via iframes in the editor. While overall only a limited set of API methods are exposed, some such as getImageForOcclusion can read arbitrary files.

CWE: CWE-22 (Path Traversal) Reporter: Bankde (Eakasit)

Affected Products

Ecosystem Package Affected Versions
PyPI aqt <= 25.09.3

Impact

Any desktop Anki user (Windows, macOS, Linux) who imports an untrusted .apkg and views card with an embedded iframe is vulnerable. No special configuration is required. The attacker can read any file accessible to the Anki process and exfiltrate its contents over the network.

Patches

A patch is available in 25.09.4

Workarounds

  • Do not import .apkg files from untrusted sources.
  • Inspect .apkg contents (it's a ZIP) for .html/.svg files with <script> tags before importing.
  • Block unexpected outbound network requests from the Anki process at the firewall level.

References

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 25.9.3"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "aqt"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "25.9.4"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-19T22:10:19Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "## Summary\n\nAnki\u0027s webview-based pages communicate with the Rust backend using an internal localhost API. Anki implements measures to prevent user scripts run in the reviewer/editor from accessing this API (https://github.com/ankitects/anki/pull/3925) but it inadvertently allows access to scripts included via iframes in the editor. While overall only a limited set of API methods are exposed, some such as `getImageForOcclusion` can read arbitrary files.\n\n**CWE:** CWE-22 (Path Traversal)\n**Reporter:** Bankde (Eakasit)\n\n## Affected Products\n\n| Ecosystem | Package | Affected Versions |\n| --------- | ------- | ----------------- |\n| PyPI      | `aqt`   | `\u003c= 25.09.3`      |\n\n## Impact\n\nAny desktop Anki user (Windows, macOS, Linux) who imports an untrusted `.apkg` and views card with an embedded iframe is vulnerable. No special configuration is required. The attacker can read any file accessible to the Anki process and exfiltrate its contents over the network.\n\n## Patches\n\nA patch is available in 25.09.4\n\n## Workarounds\n\n- Do not import `.apkg` files from untrusted sources.\n- Inspect `.apkg` contents (it\u0027s a ZIP) for `.html`/`.svg` files with `\u003cscript\u003e` tags before importing.\n- Block unexpected outbound network requests from the Anki process at the firewall level.\n\n## References\n\n- Vulnerability report: _Anki arbitrary file read vulnerability (with exfiltration)_ \u2014 Bankde (Eakasit)\n- Affected source: [`qt/aqt/mediasrv.py::_handle_local_file_request`](https://github.com/ankitects/anki/blob/5a9b54e9380c66e26391f0827867d2a728107836/qt/aqt/mediasrv.py#L223)\n- Related prior CVEs: [CVE-2024-29073](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-29073), [CVE-2024-32484](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-32484), [CVE-2025-62185](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62185), [CVE-2025-62187](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-62187)",
  "id": "GHSA-cw6h-ffmh-x6vh",
  "modified": "2026-06-19T22:10:19Z",
  "published": "2026-06-19T22:10:19Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/ankitects/anki/security/advisories/GHSA-cw6h-ffmh-x6vh"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/ankitects/anki"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "Anki: User scripts in iframes have access to the internal Anki API"
}

GHSA-CW73-R42M-9XFP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-11-13 06:30 – Updated: 2024-11-13 06:30
VLAI
Details

The LUNA RADIO PLAYER plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Directory Traversal in all versions up to, and including, 6.24.01.24 via the js/fallback.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to read the contents of arbitrary files on the server, which can contain sensitive information.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-10816"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-22"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-13T04:15:04Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "The LUNA RADIO PLAYER plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Directory Traversal in all versions up to, and including, 6.24.01.24 via the js/fallback.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to read the contents of arbitrary files on the server, which can contain sensitive information.",
  "id": "GHSA-cw73-r42m-9xfp",
  "modified": "2024-11-13T06:30:29Z",
  "published": "2024-11-13T06:30:29Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-10816"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://radioplayer.luna-universe.com/update"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/544f71f5-1798-40fd-9f55-c25dae4f557a?source=cve"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation MIT-5.1
Implementation

Strategy: Input Validation

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434.
  • Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the "../" string.
Mitigation MIT-15
Architecture and Design

For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.

Mitigation MIT-20.1
Implementation

Strategy: Input Validation

  • Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked.
  • Use a built-in path canonicalization function (such as realpath() in C) that produces the canonical version of the pathname, which effectively removes ".." sequences and symbolic links (CWE-23, CWE-59). This includes:
  • realpath() in C
  • getCanonicalPath() in Java
  • GetFullPath() in ASP.NET
  • realpath() or abs_path() in Perl
  • realpath() in PHP
Mitigation MIT-4
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks

Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].

Mitigation MIT-29
Operation

Strategy: Firewall

Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].

Mitigation MIT-17
Architecture and Design Operation

Strategy: Environment Hardening

Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.

Mitigation MIT-21.1
Architecture and Design

Strategy: Enforcement by Conversion

  • When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
  • For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-185] provide this capability.
Mitigation MIT-22
Architecture and Design Operation

Strategy: Sandbox or Jail

  • Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software.
  • OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations.
  • This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise.
  • Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
Mitigation MIT-34
Architecture and Design Operation

Strategy: Attack Surface Reduction

  • Store library, include, and utility files outside of the web document root, if possible. Otherwise, store them in a separate directory and use the web server's access control capabilities to prevent attackers from directly requesting them. One common practice is to define a fixed constant in each calling program, then check for the existence of the constant in the library/include file; if the constant does not exist, then the file was directly requested, and it can exit immediately.
  • This significantly reduces the chance of an attacker being able to bypass any protection mechanisms that are in the base program but not in the include files. It will also reduce the attack surface.
Mitigation MIT-39
Implementation
  • Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success.
  • If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files.
  • Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not.
  • In the context of path traversal, error messages which disclose path information can help attackers craft the appropriate attack strings to move through the file system hierarchy.
Mitigation MIT-16
Operation Implementation

Strategy: Environment Hardening

When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

CAPEC-126: Path Traversal

An adversary uses path manipulation methods to exploit insufficient input validation of a target to obtain access to data that should be not be retrievable by ordinary well-formed requests. A typical variety of this attack involves specifying a path to a desired file together with dot-dot-slash characters, resulting in the file access API or function traversing out of the intended directory structure and into the root file system. By replacing or modifying the expected path information the access function or API retrieves the file desired by the attacker. These attacks either involve the attacker providing a complete path to a targeted file or using control characters (e.g. path separators (/ or \) and/or dots (.)) to reach desired directories or files.

CAPEC-64: Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic

This attack targets the encoding of the URL combined with the encoding of the slash characters. An attacker can take advantage of the multiple ways of encoding a URL and abuse the interpretation of the URL. A URL may contain special character that need special syntax handling in order to be interpreted. Special characters are represented using a percentage character followed by two digits representing the octet code of the original character (%HEX-CODE). For instance US-ASCII space character would be represented with %20. This is often referred as escaped ending or percent-encoding. Since the server decodes the URL from the requests, it may restrict the access to some URL paths by validating and filtering out the URL requests it received. An attacker will try to craft an URL with a sequence of special characters which once interpreted by the server will be equivalent to a forbidden URL. It can be difficult to protect against this attack since the URL can contain other format of encoding such as UTF-8 encoding, Unicode-encoding, etc.

CAPEC-76: Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls

An attacker manipulates inputs to the target software which the target software passes to file system calls in the OS. The goal is to gain access to, and perhaps modify, areas of the file system that the target software did not intend to be accessible.

CAPEC-78: Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the use of the backslash in alternate encoding. An adversary can provide a backslash as a leading character and causes a parser to believe that the next character is special. This is called an escape. By using that trick, the adversary tries to exploit alternate ways to encode the same character which leads to filter problems and opens avenues to attack.

CAPEC-79: Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding

This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An adversary would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the adversary many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.