CVE-2026-18427 (GCVE-0-2026-18427)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-08-06 14:52 – Updated: 2026-08-06 15:44
VLAI
Title
@fastify/static vulnerable to route guard bypass via non-canonical path segments
Summary
@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving.
SSVC
Exploitation: none Automatable: yes Technical Impact: partial
CISA Coordinator (v2.0.3)
CWE
  • CWE-22 - Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
  • CWE-436 - Interpretation Conflict
Assigner
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
@fastify/static @fastify/static Affected: 0 , < 10.1.3 (semver)
Unaffected: 10.1.3 (semver)
Create a notification for this product.
Credits
alimony mcollina UlisesGascon
Show details on NVD website

{
  "containers": {
    "adp": [
      {
        "metrics": [
          {
            "other": {
              "content": {
                "id": "CVE-2026-18427",
                "options": [
                  {
                    "Exploitation": "none"
                  },
                  {
                    "Automatable": "yes"
                  },
                  {
                    "Technical Impact": "partial"
                  }
                ],
                "role": "CISA Coordinator",
                "timestamp": "2026-08-06T15:44:48.667561Z",
                "version": "2.0.3"
              },
              "type": "ssvc"
            }
          }
        ],
        "providerMetadata": {
          "dateUpdated": "2026-08-06T15:44:54.638Z",
          "orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
          "shortName": "CISA-ADP"
        },
        "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
      }
    ],
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageURL": "pkg:npm/@fastify/static",
          "product": "@fastify/static",
          "vendor": "@fastify/static",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "10.1.3",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "10.1.3",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "credits": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "reporter",
          "value": "alimony"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation developer",
          "value": "mcollina"
        },
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "type": "remediation reviewer",
          "value": "UlisesGascon"
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "supportingMedia": [
            {
              "base64": false,
              "type": "text/html",
              "value": "@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving."
            }
          ],
          "value": "@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving."
        }
      ],
      "metrics": [
        {
          "cvssV3_1": {
            "baseScore": 7.5,
            "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
            "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
            "version": "3.1"
          },
          "format": "CVSS",
          "scenarios": [
            {
              "lang": "en",
              "value": "GENERAL"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "problemTypes": [
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-22",
              "description": "CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (\u0027Path Traversal\u0027)",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "descriptions": [
            {
              "cweId": "CWE-436",
              "description": "CWE-436: Interpretation Conflict",
              "lang": "en",
              "type": "CWE"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-08-06T14:52:26.958Z",
        "orgId": "ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb",
        "shortName": "openjs"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://github.com/fastify/fastify-static/security/advisories/GHSA-423g-23ch-w7c6"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html"
        }
      ],
      "title": "@fastify/static vulnerable to route guard bypass via non-canonical path segments",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "cve-kit 1.0.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb",
    "assignerShortName": "openjs",
    "cveId": "CVE-2026-18427",
    "datePublished": "2026-08-06T14:52:26.958Z",
    "dateReserved": "2026-07-30T18:18:39.071Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-08-06T15:44:54.638Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "epss": {
      "cve": "CVE-2026-18427",
      "date": "2026-08-11",
      "epss": "0.00458",
      "percentile": "0.3758"
    },
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-18427\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\",\"published\":\"2026-08-06T16:16:38.350\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-08-06T22:16:50.143\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Received\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving.\"}],\"affected\":[{\"source\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\",\"affectedData\":[{\"vendor\":\"@fastify/static\",\"product\":\"@fastify/static\",\"defaultStatus\":\"unaffected\",\"packageURL\":\"pkg:npm/@fastify/static\",\"versions\":[{\"version\":\"0\",\"lessThan\":\"10.1.3\",\"versionType\":\"semver\",\"status\":\"affected\"},{\"version\":\"10.1.3\",\"versionType\":\"semver\",\"status\":\"unaffected\"}]}]}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N\",\"baseScore\":7.5,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"NONE\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":3.9,\"impactScore\":3.6}],\"ssvcV203\":[{\"source\":\"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\",\"ssvcData\":{\"timestamp\":\"2026-08-06T15:44:48.667561Z\",\"id\":\"CVE-2026-18427\",\"options\":[{\"exploitation\":\"none\"},{\"automatable\":\"yes\"},{\"technicalImpact\":\"partial\"}],\"role\":\"CISA Coordinator\",\"version\":\"2.0.3\"}}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-22\"},{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-436\"}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html\",\"source\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\"},{\"url\":\"https://github.com/fastify/fastify-static/security/advisories/GHSA-423g-23ch-w7c6\",\"source\":\"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\"}]}}",
    "redhat_vex": {
      "aggregate_severity": "Important",
      "current_release_date": "2026-08-07T04:53:29+00:00",
      "cve": "CVE-2026-18427",
      "id": "CVE-2026-18427",
      "initial_release_date": "2026-08-06T14:52:26.958000+00:00",
      "product_status:known_affected": "12",
      "product_status:known_not_affected": "1",
      "source": "Red Hat CSAF VEX",
      "status": "final",
      "title": "@fastify/static: @fastify/static: Information disclosure via route guard bypass",
      "url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-18427.json",
      "version": "3"
    },
    "vulnrichment": {
      "containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-18427\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"yes\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-08-06T15:44:48.667561Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-06T15:44:51.874Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"@fastify/static vulnerable to route guard bypass via non-canonical path segments\", \"credits\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"reporter\", \"value\": \"alimony\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"remediation developer\", \"value\": \"mcollina\"}, {\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"remediation reviewer\", \"value\": \"UlisesGascon\"}], \"metrics\": [{\"format\": \"CVSS\", \"cvssV3_1\": {\"version\": \"3.1\", \"baseScore\": 7.5, \"baseSeverity\": \"HIGH\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N\"}, \"scenarios\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"GENERAL\"}]}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"@fastify/static\", \"product\": \"@fastify/static\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"0\", \"lessThan\": \"10.1.3\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}, {\"status\": \"unaffected\", \"version\": \"10.1.3\", \"versionType\": \"semver\"}], \"packageURL\": \"pkg:npm/@fastify/static\", \"defaultStatus\": \"unaffected\"}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/fastify/fastify-static/security/advisories/GHSA-423g-23ch-w7c6\"}, {\"url\": \"https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html\"}], \"x_generator\": {\"engine\": \"cve-kit 1.0.0\"}, \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving.\", \"supportingMedia\": [{\"type\": \"text/html\", \"value\": \"@fastify/static before version 10.1.3 contains an incomplete fix for a previous route guard bypass. The static file handler rejected only parent directory segments, but it did not canonicalize dot segments, duplicate slashes, encoded dots, or backslashes before route matching and before delegating to the send layer. As a result, an unauthenticated attacker could request a file protected by a route based guard using a non canonical path form that misses the guarded route yet resolves back onto the protected file, disclosing its contents. Applications that protect a subtree of the static root with a route based guard are affected, while applications relying on the allowedPath option are not. This is fixed in @fastify/static 10.1.3, which canonicalizes the pathname, including rejecting backslashes, on the path used for routing and serving.\", \"base64\": false}]}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-22\", \"description\": \"CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (\u0027Path Traversal\u0027)\"}]}, {\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-436\", \"description\": \"CWE-436: Interpretation Conflict\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\", \"shortName\": \"openjs\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-06T14:52:26.958Z\"}}}",
      "cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-18427\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-08-06T15:44:54.638Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-07-30T18:18:39.071Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-08-06T14:52:26.958Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"openjs\"}",
      "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
      "dataVersion": "5.2"
    }
  }
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…