CWE-22
Allowed-with-ReviewImproper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
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.
13216 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-GH7H-9VRX-5PC9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-04-11 09:30 – Updated: 2026-04-01 18:34Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in CMSJunkie - WordPress Business Directory Plugins WP-BusinessDirectory allows Path Traversal. This issue affects WP-BusinessDirectory: from n/a through 3.1.2.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-32629"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-04-11T09:15:33Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (\u0027Path Traversal\u0027) vulnerability in CMSJunkie - WordPress Business Directory Plugins WP-BusinessDirectory allows Path Traversal. This issue affects WP-BusinessDirectory: from n/a through 3.1.2.",
"id": "GHSA-gh7h-9vrx-5pc9",
"modified": "2026-04-01T18:34:41Z",
"published": "2025-04-11T09:30:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-32629"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/wp-businessdirectory/vulnerability/wordpress-wp-businessdirectory-plugin-3-1-2-arbitrary-file-deletion-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH82-F9X8-5FRX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-22 18:34 – Updated: 2026-06-22 18:34A path traversal vulnerability exists in keras-team/keras version 3.14.0, specifically in the DiskIOStore.make method within the Keras 3 model saving and loading library. This vulnerability arises from the improper handling of user-provided layer names, which are used to construct directory paths without sanitizing for parent directory components (..). While forward slashes (/) are restricted in layer names, directory traversal sequences are not. This allows an attacker to craft a malicious Keras model that, when saved or loaded, can escape the intended temporary working directory and perform unauthorized file system operations, such as creating directories or writing files in arbitrary locations.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-12479"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-22T16:16:33Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A path traversal vulnerability exists in keras-team/keras version 3.14.0, specifically in the `DiskIOStore.make` method within the Keras 3 model saving and loading library. This vulnerability arises from the improper handling of user-provided layer names, which are used to construct directory paths without sanitizing for parent directory components (`..`). While forward slashes (`/`) are restricted in layer names, directory traversal sequences are not. This allows an attacker to craft a malicious Keras model that, when saved or loaded, can escape the intended temporary working directory and perform unauthorized file system operations, such as creating directories or writing files in arbitrary locations.",
"id": "GHSA-gh82-f9x8-5frx",
"modified": "2026-06-22T18:34:13Z",
"published": "2026-06-22T18:34:13Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-12479"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.com/bounties/188836b9-12fc-49c7-8dbf-04f60fe33743"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH87-66C7-84H3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 00:33 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:46The Smush Image Compression and Optimization plugin before 2.7.6 for WordPress allows directory traversal.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-15079"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-10-06T18:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "The Smush Image Compression and Optimization plugin before 2.7.6 for WordPress allows directory traversal.",
"id": "GHSA-gh87-66c7-84h3",
"modified": "2025-04-20T03:46:26Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T00:33:26Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-15079"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wordpress.org/plugins/wp-smushit/#developers"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://wordpress.org/support/topic/file-transversal-bug"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH94-277F-F7J3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-03-11 15:31 – Updated: 2025-03-11 15:31A improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('path traversal') in Fortinet FortiWeb versions 7.0.0 through 7.6.0 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via crafted requests.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-55597"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-03-11T15:15:44Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory (\u0027path traversal\u0027) in Fortinet FortiWeb versions 7.0.0 through 7.6.0 allows attacker to execute unauthorized code or commands via crafted requests.",
"id": "GHSA-gh94-277f-f7j3",
"modified": "2025-03-11T15:31:02Z",
"published": "2025-03-11T15:31:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-55597"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-24-439"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH94-7237-PQ5J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:42 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:42imcat 4.4 allows directory traversal via the root/run/adm.php efile parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-20610"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-12-30T21:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "imcat 4.4 allows directory traversal via the root/run/adm.php efile parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-gh94-7237-pq5j",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:42:52Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:42:52Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-20610"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AvaterXXX/CVEs/blob/master/imcat.md#directory-traversal"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH97-3PMC-4Q84
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:48 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:48LibreHealthIO lh-ehr version REL-2.0.0 contains a Authenticated Unrestricted File Deletion vulnerability in Import template that can result in Denial of service. This attack appear to be exploitable via User controlled parameter.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-1000647"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-08-20T19:31:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "LibreHealthIO lh-ehr version REL-2.0.0 contains a Authenticated Unrestricted File Deletion vulnerability in Import template that can result in Denial of service. This attack appear to be exploitable via User controlled parameter.",
"id": "GHSA-gh97-3pmc-4q84",
"modified": "2022-05-13T01:48:39Z",
"published": "2022-05-13T01:48:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-1000647"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/LibreHealthIO/lh-ehr/issues/1212"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://0dd.zone/2018/08/07/lh-ehr-Authenticated-File-Deletion"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GH9P-Q46P-57G2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-06 20:47 – Updated: 2026-06-09 00:00Summary
Client::deleteClientFolder() in phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583 takes a URL from the caller, strips the https:// prefix, and passes the remainder to Filesystem::deleteDirectory() relative to the multisite clientFolder. No path-traversal validation runs. An admin with the INSTANCE_DELETE permission (a role short of SUPER_ADMIN) submits https://../../../<path> as the client URL and the server recursively deletes arbitrary directories under the web user's rights. Same pattern and reachability as GHSA-38m8-xrfj-v38x, which the project accepted at High severity three weeks earlier.
Details
phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583-591:
public function deleteClientFolder(string $sourceUrl): bool
{
if (!$this->isMultiSiteWriteable()) {
return false;
}
$sourcePath = str_replace(search: 'https://', replace: '', subject: $sourceUrl);
return $this->filesystem->deleteDirectory($this->clientFolder . $sourcePath);
}
str_replace strips the scheme but does nothing about ../ segments. The concatenation $this->clientFolder . $sourcePath directly feeds the filesystem call, which traverses above clientFolder without complaint.
Callers feed the URL from the HTTP request body:
phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Controller/Administration/Api/InstanceController.php:184:
if (1 !== $instanceId && $client->deleteClientFolder($clientData->url) && $client->delete($instanceId)) {
$clientData->url comes from json_decode($request->getContent()). The route is admin.api.instance.delete, gated by INSTANCE_DELETE. The controller does not validate the URL against a scheme list or canonicalize the path before handing it to deleteClientFolder().
InstanceController.php:144 (edit path) and Controller/Administration/InstanceController.php:151 (form path) both reach the same sink through different entry points.
Precedent
GHSA-38m8-xrfj-v38x (2026-03-31) disclosed the identical bug class in MediaBrowserController::index(): an admin-gated API endpoint concatenates a user-supplied filename to a base directory without traversal validation. phpMyFAQ accepted that report at High severity. The present finding is the same root cause in a different controller; the project's INSTANCE_ADD / INSTANCE_DELETE permission is a granular admin right, not SUPER_ADMIN, so a lower-tier admin can reach the sink.
Proof of Concept
Prerequisites: a phpMyFAQ 4.2.x instance with the multisite subsystem bootstrapped (there must be a non-primary instance present for the delete controller branch to fire). Alice is an admin with INSTANCE_ADD and INSTANCE_DELETE rights, no SUPER_ADMIN flag.
Step 1: Alice authenticates and retrieves the CSRF token for the instance admin page.
Step 2: Alice creates an instance whose url encodes a traversal payload. The create path at InstanceController.php:144 already concatenates to the clientFolder through the same deleteClientFolder('https://' . $hostname) call:
curl -sS -b "$ALICE_COOKIE" -X POST "$BASE/admin/api/instance" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "x-csrf-token: $CSRF" \
-d '{"url":"https://../../../tmp/pmf-poc/","instance":"poc","comment":"poc","email":"a@b","admin":"alice","password":"poc1234!"}'
Step 3: Alice deletes the instance. The request body names the instance id to delete; the controller hands clientData->url directly to deleteClientFolder:
curl -sS -b "$ALICE_COOKIE" -X POST "$BASE/admin/api/instance/2" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" -H "x-csrf-token: $CSRF" \
-d '{"url":"https://../../../tmp/pmf-poc/"}'
The server computes $sourcePath = '../../../tmp/pmf-poc/', concatenates to <clientFolder>/, and recursively deletes the resulting path.
Live verification was not attempted against the test instance because the INSTANCE_DELETE path requires the multisite/ subsystem to be bootstrapped with at least one non-primary instance; see InstanceController.php:184. The code path is unambiguous and the precedent GHSA confirmed the same admin gating was considered in-scope.
Impact
Any phpMyFAQ admin holding INSTANCE_ADD + INSTANCE_DELETE but not SUPER_ADMIN can delete arbitrary directories writable by the PHP process. Outcomes:
- Destroy other tenants' data on a shared multisite deployment by traversing above the
clientFolderinto peer directories. - Delete phpMyFAQ's own
content/,config/, or cache directories and lock the install out. - On a hosted deployment, overwrite or delete files anywhere under the web user's reach, including customer uploads outside phpMyFAQ.
phpMyFAQ's permission model gives INSTANCE_ADD / INSTANCE_DELETE as a role that a hosting operator may delegate to a subordinate admin without granting SUPER_ADMIN. That delegation is now a direct path-traversal-delete primitive.
Recommended Fix
Canonicalize and validate the URL before forming the filesystem path.
phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583:
public function deleteClientFolder(string $sourceUrl): bool
{
if (!$this->isMultiSiteWriteable()) {
return false;
}
$parsed = parse_url($sourceUrl);
if (!is_array($parsed) || !isset($parsed['host']) || ($parsed['scheme'] ?? '') !== 'https') {
return false;
}
$host = $parsed['host'];
if (!preg_match('/^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9.-]*$/i', $host)) {
return false;
}
$target = realpath($this->clientFolder . $host);
$root = realpath($this->clientFolder);
if ($target === false || $root === false || !str_starts_with($target, $root . DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR)) {
return false;
}
return $this->filesystem->deleteDirectory($target);
}
parse_url rejects malformed inputs, the regex pins the host to valid DNS characters (no /, no ..), and the realpath check ensures the resolved target lives under clientFolder. Apply the same canonicalization at the controller layer (InstanceController::add, ::update, ::delete) so the URL is validated before every call that touches the filesystem.
Found by aisafe.io
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.1.1"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "thorsten/phpmyfaq"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.1.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 4.1.1"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Packagist",
"name": "phpmyfaq/phpmyfaq"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "4.1.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-45008"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-06T20:47:54Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\n`Client::deleteClientFolder()` in `phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583` takes a URL from the caller, strips the `https://` prefix, and passes the remainder to `Filesystem::deleteDirectory()` relative to the multisite `clientFolder`. No path-traversal validation runs. An admin with the `INSTANCE_DELETE` permission (a role short of SUPER_ADMIN) submits `https://../../../\u003cpath\u003e` as the client URL and the server recursively deletes arbitrary directories under the web user\u0027s rights. Same pattern and reachability as GHSA-38m8-xrfj-v38x, which the project accepted at High severity three weeks earlier.\n\n## Details\n\n`phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583-591`:\n\n```php\npublic function deleteClientFolder(string $sourceUrl): bool\n{\n if (!$this-\u003eisMultiSiteWriteable()) {\n return false;\n }\n\n $sourcePath = str_replace(search: \u0027https://\u0027, replace: \u0027\u0027, subject: $sourceUrl);\n return $this-\u003efilesystem-\u003edeleteDirectory($this-\u003eclientFolder . $sourcePath);\n}\n```\n\n`str_replace` strips the scheme but does nothing about `../` segments. The concatenation `$this-\u003eclientFolder . $sourcePath` directly feeds the filesystem call, which traverses above `clientFolder` without complaint.\n\nCallers feed the URL from the HTTP request body:\n\n`phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Controller/Administration/Api/InstanceController.php:184`:\n\n```php\nif (1 !== $instanceId \u0026\u0026 $client-\u003edeleteClientFolder($clientData-\u003eurl) \u0026\u0026 $client-\u003edelete($instanceId)) {\n```\n\n`$clientData-\u003eurl` comes from `json_decode($request-\u003egetContent())`. The route is `admin.api.instance.delete`, gated by `INSTANCE_DELETE`. The controller does not validate the URL against a scheme list or canonicalize the path before handing it to `deleteClientFolder()`.\n\n`InstanceController.php:144` (edit path) and `Controller/Administration/InstanceController.php:151` (form path) both reach the same sink through different entry points.\n\n### Precedent\n\nGHSA-38m8-xrfj-v38x (2026-03-31) disclosed the identical bug class in `MediaBrowserController::index()`: an admin-gated API endpoint concatenates a user-supplied filename to a base directory without traversal validation. phpMyFAQ accepted that report at High severity. The present finding is the same root cause in a different controller; the project\u0027s INSTANCE_ADD / INSTANCE_DELETE permission is a granular admin right, not SUPER_ADMIN, so a lower-tier admin can reach the sink.\n\n## Proof of Concept\n\nPrerequisites: a phpMyFAQ 4.2.x instance with the multisite subsystem bootstrapped (there must be a non-primary instance present for the delete controller branch to fire). Alice is an admin with `INSTANCE_ADD` and `INSTANCE_DELETE` rights, no `SUPER_ADMIN` flag.\n\nStep 1: Alice authenticates and retrieves the CSRF token for the instance admin page.\n\nStep 2: Alice creates an instance whose `url` encodes a traversal payload. The create path at `InstanceController.php:144` already concatenates to the clientFolder through the same `deleteClientFolder(`\u0027https://\u0027 . $hostname`)` call:\n\n```bash\ncurl -sS -b \"$ALICE_COOKIE\" -X POST \"$BASE/admin/api/instance\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" -H \"x-csrf-token: $CSRF\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"url\":\"https://../../../tmp/pmf-poc/\",\"instance\":\"poc\",\"comment\":\"poc\",\"email\":\"a@b\",\"admin\":\"alice\",\"password\":\"poc1234!\"}\u0027\n```\n\nStep 3: Alice deletes the instance. The request body names the instance id to delete; the controller hands `clientData-\u003eurl` directly to `deleteClientFolder`:\n\n```bash\ncurl -sS -b \"$ALICE_COOKIE\" -X POST \"$BASE/admin/api/instance/2\" \\\n -H \"Content-Type: application/json\" -H \"x-csrf-token: $CSRF\" \\\n -d \u0027{\"url\":\"https://../../../tmp/pmf-poc/\"}\u0027\n```\n\nThe server computes `$sourcePath = \u0027../../../tmp/pmf-poc/\u0027`, concatenates to `\u003cclientFolder\u003e/`, and recursively deletes the resulting path.\n\nLive verification was not attempted against the test instance because the INSTANCE_DELETE path requires the multisite/ subsystem to be bootstrapped with at least one non-primary instance; see `InstanceController.php:184`. The code path is unambiguous and the precedent GHSA confirmed the same admin gating was considered in-scope.\n\n## Impact\n\nAny phpMyFAQ admin holding `INSTANCE_ADD` + `INSTANCE_DELETE` but not SUPER_ADMIN can delete arbitrary directories writable by the PHP process. Outcomes:\n\n- Destroy other tenants\u0027 data on a shared multisite deployment by traversing above the `clientFolder` into peer directories.\n- Delete phpMyFAQ\u0027s own `content/`, `config/`, or cache directories and lock the install out.\n- On a hosted deployment, overwrite or delete files anywhere under the web user\u0027s reach, including customer uploads outside phpMyFAQ.\n\nphpMyFAQ\u0027s permission model gives `INSTANCE_ADD` / `INSTANCE_DELETE` as a role that a hosting operator may delegate to a subordinate admin without granting SUPER_ADMIN. That delegation is now a direct path-traversal-delete primitive.\n\n## Recommended Fix\n\nCanonicalize and validate the URL before forming the filesystem path.\n\n`phpmyfaq/src/phpMyFAQ/Instance/Client.php:583`:\n\n```php\npublic function deleteClientFolder(string $sourceUrl): bool\n{\n if (!$this-\u003eisMultiSiteWriteable()) {\n return false;\n }\n\n $parsed = parse_url($sourceUrl);\n if (!is_array($parsed) || !isset($parsed[\u0027host\u0027]) || ($parsed[\u0027scheme\u0027] ?? \u0027\u0027) !== \u0027https\u0027) {\n return false;\n }\n\n $host = $parsed[\u0027host\u0027];\n if (!preg_match(\u0027/^[a-z0-9][a-z0-9.-]*$/i\u0027, $host)) {\n return false;\n }\n\n $target = realpath($this-\u003eclientFolder . $host);\n $root = realpath($this-\u003eclientFolder);\n if ($target === false || $root === false || !str_starts_with($target, $root . DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR)) {\n return false;\n }\n\n return $this-\u003efilesystem-\u003edeleteDirectory($target);\n}\n```\n\n`parse_url` rejects malformed inputs, the regex pins the host to valid DNS characters (no `/`, no `..`), and the `realpath` check ensures the resolved target lives under `clientFolder`. Apply the same canonicalization at the controller layer (`InstanceController::add`, `::update`, `::delete`) so the URL is validated before every call that touches the filesystem.\n\n---\n*Found by [aisafe.io](https://aisafe.io)*",
"id": "GHSA-gh9p-q46p-57g2",
"modified": "2026-06-09T00:00:57Z",
"published": "2026-05-06T20:47:54Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/thorsten/phpMyFAQ/security/advisories/GHSA-gh9p-q46p-57g2"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-45008"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/thorsten/phpMyFAQ"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/phpmyfaq-path-traversal-in-client-deleteclientfolder-via-url-parameter"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "phpMyFAQ: Path Traversal in Client::deleteClientFolder enables arbitrary directory deletion by non-super-admin admins"
}
GHSA-GHHG-C6WQ-2HR9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-03 03:19 – Updated: 2022-05-03 03:19Directory traversal vulnerability in (1) pkgadd and (2) pkgrm in SCO UnixWare 7.1.4 allows local users to gain privileges via unknown vectors.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2008-1343"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2008-03-17T16:44:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in (1) pkgadd and (2) pkgrm in SCO UnixWare 7.1.4 allows local users to gain privileges via unknown vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-ghhg-c6wq-2hr9",
"modified": "2022-05-03T03:19:12Z",
"published": "2022-05-03T03:19:12Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-1343"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/41200"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/29370"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/28236"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2008/0871"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GHMH-8QX5-2GFP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 03:46 – Updated: 2022-05-17 03:46Directory traversal vulnerability in util.c in GNU patch 2.6.1 and earlier allows user-assisted remote attackers to create or overwrite arbitrary files via a filename that is specified with a .. (dot dot) or full pathname, a related issue to CVE-2010-1679.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2010-4651"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2011-03-11T22:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in util.c in GNU patch 2.6.1 and earlier allows user-assisted remote attackers to create or overwrite arbitrary files via a filename that is specified with a .. (dot dot) or full pathname, a related issue to CVE-2010-1679.",
"id": "GHSA-ghmh-8qx5-2gfp",
"modified": "2022-05-17T03:46:38Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T03:46:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-4651"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667529"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/patch.git/commit/?id=685a78b6052f4df6eac6d625a545cfb54a6ac0e1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.apple.com/archives/security-announce/2011//Jun/msg00000.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-March/055241.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-March/055246.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-patch/2010-12/msg00000.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/01/05/10"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/01/06/19"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/01/06/20"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2011/01/06/21"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/43663"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/43677"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4723"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/46768"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2011/0600"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GHQ7-VVP6-23X7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 02:47 – Updated: 2025-04-12 12:55Directory traversal vulnerability in the bitrix.xscan module before 1.0.4 for Bitrix allows remote authenticated users to rename arbitrary files, and consequently obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service, via a .. (dot dot) in the file parameter to admin/bitrix.xscan_worker.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-8357"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2015-12-16T21:59:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in the bitrix.xscan module before 1.0.4 for Bitrix allows remote authenticated users to rename arbitrary files, and consequently obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service, via a .. (dot dot) in the file parameter to admin/bitrix.xscan_worker.php.",
"id": "GHSA-ghq7-vvp6-23x7",
"modified": "2025-04-12T12:55:05Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T02:47:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-8357"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://marketplace.1c-bitrix.ru/solutions/bitrix.xscan/#tab-log-link"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/38976"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.htbridge.com/advisory/HTB23278"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://packetstormsecurity.com/files/134765/bitrix.scan-Bitrix-1.0.3-Path-Traversal.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/537072/100/0/threaded"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Mitigation MIT-5.1
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
- 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
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.