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.
13034 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-XG3M-83F6-PQ94
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:48 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:48A path traversal vulnerability in the Juniper Networks SRX and vSRX Series may allow an authenticated J-web user to read sensitive system files. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX and vSRX Series: 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R2-S6, 19.3R3-S1; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R2-S4, 19.4R3; 20.1 versions prior to 20.1R1-S4, 20.1R2; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R1-S3, 20.2R2; This issue does not affect Juniper Networks Junos OS versions prior to 19.3R1.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-0231"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2021-04-22T20:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A path traversal vulnerability in the Juniper Networks SRX and vSRX Series may allow an authenticated J-web user to read sensitive system files. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS on SRX and vSRX Series: 19.3 versions prior to 19.3R2-S6, 19.3R3-S1; 19.4 versions prior to 19.4R2-S4, 19.4R3; 20.1 versions prior to 20.1R1-S4, 20.1R2; 20.2 versions prior to 20.2R1-S3, 20.2R2; This issue does not affect Juniper Networks Junos OS versions prior to 19.3R1.",
"id": "GHSA-xg3m-83f6-pq94",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:48:10Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:48:10Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-0231"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://kb.juniper.net/JSA11126"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-XG46-8F9Q-RMHF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-07-26 00:30 – Updated: 2024-04-04 06:21RTX TRAP v1.0 allows attackers to perform a directory traversal via a crafted request sent to the endpoint /data/.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-31457"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-07-25T22:15:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "RTX TRAP v1.0 allows attackers to perform a directory traversal via a crafted request sent to the endpoint /data/.",
"id": "GHSA-xg46-8f9q-rmhf",
"modified": "2024-04-04T06:21:29Z",
"published": "2023-07-26T00:30:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-31457"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://medium.com/%40rohitgautam26/cve-2022-31457-2027b7678af7"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://medium.com/@rohitgautam26/cve-2022-31457-2027b7678af7"
}
],
"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-XG4X-2CMM-RGC9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-29 21:31 – Updated: 2026-04-29 21:31LifeSize ClearSea 3.1.4 contains directory traversal vulnerabilities that allow authenticated attackers to download and upload arbitrary files by manipulating path parameters in the smartgui interface. Attackers can exploit the upload endpoint with directory traversal sequences to write files to arbitrary locations on the system, enabling remote code execution.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-25312"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-29T20:16:26Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "LifeSize ClearSea 3.1.4 contains directory traversal vulnerabilities that allow authenticated attackers to download and upload arbitrary files by manipulating path parameters in the smartgui interface. Attackers can exploit the upload endpoint with directory traversal sequences to write files to arbitrary locations on the system, enabling remote code execution.",
"id": "GHSA-xg4x-2cmm-rgc9",
"modified": "2026-04-29T21:31:30Z",
"published": "2026-04-29T21:31:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-25312"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/44390"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/lifesize-clearsea-directory-traversal-remote-code-execution"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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: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-XG5R-8J97-2WRJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2019-02-18 23:39 – Updated: 2020-08-31 18:10Affected versions of restafary are susceptible to a directory traversal vulnerability when a root path is specified in the configuration.
Proof of Concept
curl -i -s -k -X 'GET' -H 'Authorization: Basic YWRtaW46cGFzc3dvcmQ=' 'http://localhost:8000/api/v1/fs/..%2f..%2fetc/passwd'
Recommendation
Update to version 1.6.1 or later.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "restafary"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.6.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-10528"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-06-16T22:03:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Affected versions of `restafary` are susceptible to a directory traversal vulnerability when a root path is specified in the configuration.\n\n\nProof of Concept\n\n```\ncurl -i -s -k -X \u0027GET\u0027 -H \u0027Authorization: Basic YWRtaW46cGFzc3dvcmQ=\u0027 \u0027http://localhost:8000/api/v1/fs/..%2f..%2fetc/passwd\u0027\n```\n\n\n## Recommendation\n\nUpdate to version 1.6.1 or later.",
"id": "GHSA-xg5r-8j97-2wrj",
"modified": "2020-08-31T18:10:25Z",
"published": "2019-02-18T23:39:22Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-10528"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-xg5r-8j97-2wrj"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.npmjs.com/advisories/89"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [],
"summary": "Directory Traversal in restafary"
}
GHSA-XG73-94FP-G449
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-03-24 22:01 – Updated: 2024-10-01 19:24Impact
Users of the MLflow Open Source Project who are hosting the MLflow Model Registry using the mlflow server or mlflow ui commands using an MLflow version older than MLflow 2.2.1 may be vulnerable to a remote file access exploit if they are not limiting who can query their server (for example, by using a cloud VPC, an IP allowlist for inbound requests, or authentication / authorization middleware).
This issue only affects users and integrations that run the mlflow server and mlflow ui commands. Integrations that do not make use of mlflow server or mlflow ui are unaffected; for example, the Databricks Managed MLflow product and MLflow on Azure Machine Learning do not make use of these commands and are not impacted by these vulnerabilities in any way.
The vulnerability detailed in https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1177 enables an actor to download arbitrary files unrelated to MLflow from the host server, including any files stored in remote locations to which the host server has access.
Patches
This vulnerability has been patched in MLflow 2.2.1, which was released to PyPI on March 2nd, 2023. If you are using mlflow server or mlflow ui with the MLflow Model Registry, we recommend upgrading to MLflow 2.2.1 as soon as possible.
Workarounds
If you are using the MLflow open source mlflow server or mlflow ui commands, we strongly recommend limiting who can access your MLflow Model Registry and MLflow Tracking servers using a cloud VPC, an IP allowlist for inbound requests, authentication / authorization middleware, or another access restriction mechanism of your choosing.
If you are using the MLflow open source mlflow server or mlflow ui commands, we also strongly recommend limiting the remote files to which your MLflow Model Registry and MLflow Tracking servers have access. For example, if your MLflow Model Registry or MLflow Tracking server uses cloud-hosted blob storage for MLflow artifacts, make sure to restrict the scope of your server's cloud credentials such that it can only access files and directories related to MLflow.
References
More information about the vulnerability is available at https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1177.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.2.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "mlflow"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.2.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-1177"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22",
"CWE-29"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-03-24T22:01:09Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2023-03-24T15:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Impact\n\nUsers of the MLflow Open Source Project who are hosting the MLflow Model Registry using the `mlflow server` or `mlflow ui` commands using an MLflow version older than MLflow 2.2.1 may be vulnerable to a remote file access exploit if they are not limiting who can query their server (for example, by using a cloud VPC, an IP allowlist for inbound requests, or authentication / authorization middleware).\n\nThis issue only affects users and integrations that run the `mlflow server` and `mlflow ui` commands. Integrations that do not make use of `mlflow server` or `mlflow ui` are unaffected; for example, the Databricks Managed MLflow product and MLflow on Azure Machine Learning do not make use of these commands and are not impacted by these vulnerabilities in any way.\n\nThe vulnerability detailed in https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1177 enables an actor to download arbitrary files unrelated to MLflow from the host server, including any files stored in remote locations to which the host server has access.\n\n### Patches\nThis vulnerability has been patched in MLflow 2.2.1, which was released to PyPI on March 2nd, 2023. If you are using `mlflow server` or `mlflow ui` with the MLflow Model Registry, we recommend upgrading to MLflow 2.2.1 as soon as possible.\n\n### Workarounds\nIf you are using the MLflow open source `mlflow server` or `mlflow ui` commands, we strongly recommend limiting who can access your MLflow Model Registry and MLflow Tracking servers using a cloud VPC, an IP allowlist for inbound requests, authentication / authorization middleware, or another access restriction mechanism of your choosing.\n\nIf you are using the MLflow open source `mlflow server` or `mlflow ui` commands, we also strongly recommend limiting the remote files to which your MLflow Model Registry and MLflow Tracking servers have access. For example, if your MLflow Model Registry or MLflow Tracking server uses cloud-hosted blob storage for MLflow artifacts, make sure to restrict the scope of your server\u0027s cloud credentials such that it can only access files and directories related to MLflow.\n\n### References\nMore information about the vulnerability is available at https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1177.",
"id": "GHSA-xg73-94fp-g449",
"modified": "2024-10-01T19:24:26Z",
"published": "2023-03-24T22:01:09Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/security/advisories/GHSA-xg73-94fp-g449"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-1177"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/pull/7891/commits/7162a50c654792c21f3e4a160eb1a0e6a34f6e6e"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/commit/7162a50c654792c21f3e4a160eb1a0e6a34f6e6e"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/mlflow/PYSEC-2023-29.yaml"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://huntr.dev/bounties/1fe8f21a-c438-4cba-9add-e8a5dab94e28"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "mlflow is vulnerable to remote file access in `mlflow server` and `mlflow ui` CLIs"
}
GHSA-XG75-3277-GVVJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2019-03-25 18:04 – Updated: 2021-09-21 22:30Versions of serve before 7.1.3 are vulnerable to Directory Traversal. File paths are not sanitized leading to unauthorized access of system files.
Recommendation
Upgrade to version 7.1.3 or later
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "serve"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.1.3"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-5417"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-06-16T22:03:13Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Versions of `serve` before 7.1.3 are vulnerable to Directory Traversal. File paths are not sanitized leading to unauthorized access of system files.\n\n\n## Recommendation\n\nUpgrade to version 7.1.3 or later",
"id": "GHSA-xg75-3277-gvvj",
"modified": "2021-09-21T22:30:46Z",
"published": "2019-03-25T18:04:01Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-5417"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://hackerone.com/reports/358645"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-xg75-3277-gvvj"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.npmjs.com/advisories/795"
}
],
"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"
}
],
"summary": "Directory Traversal in serve"
}
GHSA-XG84-7MCJ-V6MX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-01 03:31 – Updated: 2026-05-01 03:31A vulnerability has been found in Fujian Apex LiveBOS up to 2.0. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /feed/UploadImage.do of the component Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument filename leads to path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 2.1 is recommended to address this issue. Upgrading the affected component is advised.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-7519"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-01T01:16:17Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability has been found in Fujian Apex LiveBOS up to 2.0. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /feed/UploadImage.do of the component Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument filename leads to path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 2.1 is recommended to address this issue. Upgrading the affected component is advised.",
"id": "GHSA-xg84-7mcj-v6mx",
"modified": "2026-05-01T03:31:23Z",
"published": "2026-05-01T03:31:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-7519"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://my.feishu.cn/docx/TCyMdptvaoTQCvxkHLbceJZCnge?from=from_copylink"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/submit/804096"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/360333"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/vuln/360333/cti"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-XG98-5M8G-VC99
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:50 – Updated: 2022-05-14 01:50KindEditor through 4.1.11 has a path traversal vulnerability in php/upload_json.php. Anyone can browse a file or directory in the kindeditor/attached/ folder via the path parameter without authentication.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-18950"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-11-05T09:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "KindEditor through 4.1.11 has a path traversal vulnerability in php/upload_json.php. Anyone can browse a file or directory in the kindeditor/attached/ folder via the path parameter without authentication.",
"id": "GHSA-xg98-5m8g-vc99",
"modified": "2022-05-14T01:50:42Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:50:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-18950"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/kindsoft/kindeditor/issues/289"
}
],
"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-XG9W-VG3G-6M68
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-01-13 21:54 – Updated: 2026-01-13 21:54Summary
A path traversal vulnerability exists in GuardDog's safe_extract() function that allows malicious PyPI packages to write arbitrary files outside the intended extraction directory, leading to Arbitrary File Overwrite and Remote Code Execution on systems running GuardDog.
CWE: CWE-22 (Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory)
Details
Vulnerable Code
File: guarddog/utils/archives.py
elif zipfile.is_zipfile(source_archive):
with zipfile.ZipFile(source_archive, "r") as zip:
for file in zip.namelist():
# Note: zip.extract cleans up any malicious file name
# such as directory traversal attempts This is not the
# case of zipfile.extractall
zip.extract(file, path=os.path.join(target_directory, file)) # ❌ VULNERABLE
Root Cause
The comment about zip.extract() fooled me at first :) then I noticed the os.path.join() call.
The vulnerability stems from incorrect usage of Python's zipfile.ZipFile.extract() API:
- The
pathparameter should be the target directory, not a full file path extract()automatically appends the member name to the path- By passing
os.path.join(target_directory, file), GuardDog causes the filename to be appended twice - This breaks zipfile's built-in path traversal sanitization
Attack Vector
- Attacker creates malicious wheel with path traversal filenames
- Uploads to PyPI or distributes directly
- Package scan:
guarddog pypi scan malicious-pkg - GuardDog downloads and extracts the package
- Malicious files written to arbitrary locations
- Code execution could be achieved
Impact
Impact depends on how GuardDog is running and under which environment.
Critical Scenarios
- Immediate Code Execution
- Write to
~/.bashrc→ executes on next shell -
Write to
~/.profile→ executes on login -
Persistent Backdoors
- Write to
~/.ssh/authorized_keys→ SSH access - Write to
/etc/cron.d/malicious→ scheduled execution (if root) - Write to systemd user services → persistent execution
and more...
Credits
Reported by: Charbel (dwbruijn)
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "guarddog"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.7.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-22871"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-01-13T21:54:49Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-01-13T21:15:55Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "## Summary\n\nA **path traversal vulnerability** exists in GuardDog\u0027s `safe_extract()` function that allows malicious PyPI packages to write arbitrary files outside the intended extraction directory, leading to **Arbitrary File Overwrite** and **Remote Code Execution** on systems running GuardDog.\n\n**CWE:** CWE-22 (Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory)\n\n## Details\n\n### Vulnerable Code\n\n**File:** `guarddog/utils/archives.py`\n\n```python\nelif zipfile.is_zipfile(source_archive):\n with zipfile.ZipFile(source_archive, \"r\") as zip:\n for file in zip.namelist():\n # Note: zip.extract cleans up any malicious file name\n # such as directory traversal attempts This is not the\n # case of zipfile.extractall\n zip.extract(file, path=os.path.join(target_directory, file)) # \u274c VULNERABLE\n```\n\n### Root Cause\n\nThe comment about `zip.extract()` fooled me at first :) then I noticed the `os.path.join()` call. \nThe vulnerability stems from **incorrect usage of Python\u0027s `zipfile.ZipFile.extract()` API**:\n\n- The `path` parameter should be the **target directory**, not a full file path\n- `extract()` automatically appends the member name to the path\n- By passing `os.path.join(target_directory, file)`, GuardDog causes the filename to be appended **twice**\n- This breaks zipfile\u0027s built-in path traversal sanitization\n\n### Attack Vector\n\n1. Attacker creates malicious wheel with path traversal filenames\n2. Uploads to PyPI or distributes directly\n3. Package scan: `guarddog pypi scan malicious-pkg`\n4. GuardDog downloads and extracts the package\n5. Malicious files written to arbitrary locations\n6. Code execution could be achieved\n\n## Impact\n\nImpact depends on how GuardDog is running and under which environment.\n\n### Critical Scenarios\n\n1. **Immediate Code Execution**\n - Write to `~/.bashrc` \u2192 executes on next shell\n - Write to `~/.profile` \u2192 executes on login\n\n2. **Persistent Backdoors**\n - Write to `~/.ssh/authorized_keys` \u2192 SSH access\n - Write to `/etc/cron.d/malicious` \u2192 scheduled execution (if root)\n - Write to systemd user services \u2192 persistent execution\n\nand more...\n\n## Credits\n\n**Reported by:** Charbel (dwbruijn)",
"id": "GHSA-xg9w-vg3g-6m68",
"modified": "2026-01-13T21:54:49Z",
"published": "2026-01-13T21:54:49Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/guarddog/security/advisories/GHSA-xg9w-vg3g-6m68"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22871"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/guarddog/commit/9aa6a725b2c71d537d3c18d1c15621395ebb879c"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/DataDog/guarddog"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "GuardDog Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Overwrite and RCE"
}
GHSA-XGCM-WJ22-XMCF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-27 09:31 – Updated: 2026-05-27 09:31Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in Archiving Pull functionality in Synology Surveillance Station before 9.2.2-11575 and 9.2.2-9575 allows remote authenticated users with administrator privileges to limited file write via unspecified vectors.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-47267"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-27T09:16:25Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory (\u0027Path Traversal\u0027) vulnerability in Archiving Pull functionality in Synology Surveillance Station before 9.2.2-11575 and 9.2.2-9575 allows remote authenticated users with administrator privileges to limited file write via unspecified vectors.",
"id": "GHSA-xgcm-wj22-xmcf",
"modified": "2026-05-27T09:31:16Z",
"published": "2026-05-27T09:31:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47267"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.synology.com/en-global/security/advisory/Synology_SA_24_25"
}
],
"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:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
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.