<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://db.gcve.eu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-11-05T04:37:47.346668+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@gcve.eu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://db.gcve.eu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-104102</id>
    <title>fkie_cve-2026-104102</title>
    <updated>2026-11-05T04:37:47.347886+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>copyparty is a portable file server. Prior to 1.20.19, FTP upload path handling does not confine destinations to configured copyparty volumes. When FTP or FTPS is explicitly enabled, a low-privileged authenticated user can submit traversal paths during upload to create a new file outside configured volumes wherever the copyparty process has write permission. The attacker cannot read or overwrite files, the output name receives a randomized suffix, and copyparty does not execute the file; however, unrelated software on the same host could process the newly created file. This issue is fixed in version 1.20.19.</p>
      </div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-104102"/>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-phv8-wgjp-g4p9</id>
    <title>GHSA-phv8-wgjp-g4p9 — copyparty FTP: upload outside defined volumes (limited path traversal)</title>
    <updated>2026-11-05T04:37:47.347971+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> PyPI: copyparty</p>
<p>The FTP and FTPS server -- if enabled -- would allow uploading to any folder that the copyparty process had permission to write to.</p>
<p>The FTP-server is default-disabled, and must be explicitly enabled in the config with global-option `ftp` or `ftps` to be affected. Additionally, SFTP was not affected at all; only FTP and FTPS.</p>
<p>This was not a full read/write path-traversal; it had the following limitations:
* Only applied to uploads; it was not possible to read/download existing files in this manner.
* The output filename was not fully controllable; a randomized suffix would always be appended to the filename.
* Existing files could not be overwritten or appended to; only new files could be created.
* Filesystem-permissions would prevent writing to system folders, as copyparty surely does not run as root in most deployments.
* Copyparty itself will not execute arbitrary files as code by default, so this vulnerability could not be used to execute arbitrary code through copyparty.</p>
<p>The main concern is the potential effect on other unrelated software which is running on the same system.</p>
<p>The severity is assuming the worst case (SC:H/SI:H), that the same machine is running some unrelated software that will execute new arbitrarily-named files as code, and that the copyparty process has sufficient privileges to write files into the config-folder of that unrelated software.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-phv8-wgjp-g4p9"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
