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.
13071 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-4X5R-PXFX-6JF8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-15 17:14 – Updated: 2026-07-15 22:05Impact
Using @babel/core to compile maliciously crafted code can allow ab attacker to read any source map from the system that is running Babel, if these conditions are all true:
- the attacker controls the input source code
- the attacker can read the output source code
- the attacker knows the path of the source map file that they want to read
Users that only compile trusted code are not impacted.
Patches
The vulnerability has been fixed in @babel/core@7.29.6 and @babel/core@8.0.0-rc.6.
Workarounds
Callers can mitigate the issue without upgrading by setting inputSourceMap: false in their Babel options.
Callers can also manually extract the #sourceMappingURL comment from the input source code, validate whether the source map that it links to is allowed to be read, and if it is pass an object to inputSourceMap (passing false when it's not).
Credits
Thanks Teodor-Cristian Radoi for reporting the vulnerability.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c 8.0.0-rc.5"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@babel/core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "8.0.0-alpha.0"
},
{
"fixed": "8.0.0-rc.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 7.29.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@babel/core"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "7.29.6"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-49356"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-15T17:14:14Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-22T18:16:41Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "## Impact\n\nUsing `@babel/core` to compile maliciously crafted code can allow ab attacker to read any source map from the system that is running Babel, if these conditions are _all_ true:\n- the attacker controls the input source code\n- the attacker can read the output source code\n- the attacker knows the path of the source map file that they want to read\n\n**Users that only compile trusted code are not impacted.**\n\n## Patches\n\nThe vulnerability has been fixed in `@babel/core@7.29.6` and `@babel/core@8.0.0-rc.6`.\n\n## Workarounds\n\nCallers can mitigate the issue without upgrading by setting [`inputSourceMap: false`](https://babeljs.io/docs/options#inputsourcemap) in their Babel options.\n\nCallers can also manually extract the `#sourceMappingURL` comment from the input source code, validate whether the source map that it links to is allowed to be read, and if it is pass an object to `inputSourceMap` (passing `false` when it\u0027s not).\n\n## Credits\n\nThanks Teodor-Cristian Radoi for reporting the vulnerability.",
"id": "GHSA-4x5r-pxfx-6jf8",
"modified": "2026-07-15T22:05:27Z",
"published": "2026-06-15T17:14:14Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/babel/babel/security/advisories/GHSA-4x5r-pxfx-6jf8"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-49356"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://babeljs.io/docs/options#inputsourcemap"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/babel/babel"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "@babel/core: Arbitrary File Read via sourceMappingURL Comment"
}
GHSA-4X63-3P7Q-XMH7
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:18 – Updated: 2022-12-12 16:55A path traversal vulnerability exists in Jenkins HTML Publisher Plugin 1.15 and older in HtmlPublisherTarget.java that allows attackers able to configure the HTML Publisher build step to override arbitrary files on the Jenkins master. In version 1.16, non-alphanumeric characters in report names are escaped for use as part of a URL and as a directory name.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.15"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.plugins:htmlpublisher"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "1.16"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-1000175"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2022-12-12T16:55:41Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2018-05-08T15:29:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A path traversal vulnerability exists in Jenkins HTML Publisher Plugin 1.15 and older in HtmlPublisherTarget.java that allows attackers able to configure the HTML Publisher build step to override arbitrary files on the Jenkins master. In version 1.16, non-alphanumeric characters in report names are escaped for use as part of a URL and as a directory name.",
"id": "GHSA-4x63-3p7q-xmh7",
"modified": "2022-12-12T16:55:41Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:18:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-1000175"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/htmlpublisher-plugin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jenkins.io/security/advisory/2018-04-16"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Jenkins HTML Publisher Plugin path traversal vulnerability"
}
GHSA-4X63-78PQ-HQC9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-05 09:30 – Updated: 2025-12-08 09:30Sharp NEC Displays (P403, P463, P553, P703, P801, X554UN, X464UN, X554UNS, X464UNV, X474HB, X464UNS, X554UNV, X555UNS, X555UNV, X754HB, X554HB, E705, E805, E905, UN551S, UN551VS, X551UHD, X651UHD, X841UHD, X981UHD, MD551C8) allows an attacker execute remote code by sending unintended parameters in http request.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-7077"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-05T07:15:09Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "Sharp NEC Displays (P403, P463, P553, P703, P801, X554UN, X464UN, X554UNS, X464UNV, X474HB, X464UNS, X554UNV, X555UNS, X555UNV, X754HB, X554HB, E705, E805, E905, UN551S, UN551VS, X551UHD, X651UHD, X841UHD, X981UHD, MD551C8) allows an attacker execute remote code by sending unintended parameters in http request.",
"id": "GHSA-4x63-78pq-hqc9",
"modified": "2025-12-08T09:30:17Z",
"published": "2024-02-05T09:30:28Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-7077"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://sharp-displays.jp.sharp/global/support/info/A4_vulnerability.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.sharp-nec-displays.com/global/support/info/A4_vulnerability.html"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X6G-78GW-MGR8
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-08-13 12:30 – Updated: 2024-08-13 12:30Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') vulnerability in WPDeveloper BetterDocs allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects BetterDocs: from n/a through 3.5.8.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-43129"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-08-13T11:15:18Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory (\u0027Path Traversal\u0027) vulnerability in WPDeveloper BetterDocs allows PHP Local File Inclusion.This issue affects BetterDocs: from n/a through 3.5.8.",
"id": "GHSA-4x6g-78gw-mgr8",
"modified": "2024-08-13T12:30:53Z",
"published": "2024-08-13T12:30:53Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-43129"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://patchstack.com/database/vulnerability/betterdocs/wordpress-betterdocs-plugin-3-5-8-local-file-inclusion-vulnerability?_s_id=cve"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X73-R52R-6J65
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-07-08 06:31 – Updated: 2026-07-08 06:31The Simple Coherent Form plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the removeUploadDir function in all versions up to, and including, 2.4.13. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary files on the server, which can easily lead to remote code execution when the right file is deleted (such as wp-config.php). The scf_get_id_upload endpoint freely issues a valid scf_upload_file_removal nonce to any unauthenticated visitor, and the removal endpoint's secondary hash check is forgeable offline because it relies on a hardcoded salt embedded in the plugin source, meaning neither control presents a real authorization boundary.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-14487"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-07-08T05:16:26Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "The Simple Coherent Form plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the removeUploadDir function in all versions up to, and including, 2.4.13. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary files on the server, which can easily lead to remote code execution when the right file is deleted (such as wp-config.php). The scf_get_id_upload endpoint freely issues a valid scf_upload_file_removal nonce to any unauthenticated visitor, and the removal endpoint\u0027s secondary hash check is forgeable offline because it relies on a hardcoded salt embedded in the plugin source, meaning neither control presents a real authorization boundary.",
"id": "GHSA-4x73-r52r-6j65",
"modified": "2026-07-08T06:31:35Z",
"published": "2026-07-08T06:31:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-14487"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/simple-coherent-form/tags/2.4.13/includes/fields/file.php#L1387"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/simple-coherent-form/tags/2.4.13/includes/fields/file.php#L1494"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/simple-coherent-form/tags/2.4.13/includes/fields/file.php#L1521"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/simple-coherent-form/tags/2.4.13/includes/fields/file.php#L1544"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/simple-coherent-form/tags/2.4.13/includes/fields/file.php#L43"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.wordfence.com/threat-intel/vulnerabilities/id/f4831e75-dc0e-4d6f-b2cb-8498d8629319?source=cve"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X7R-C6X9-QGV3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-02-21 18:31 – Updated: 2024-02-21 18:31A vulnerability was found in ZhongBangKeJi CRMEB 5.2.2. It has been declared as critical. This vulnerability affects the function save/delete of the file /adminapi/system/crud. The manipulation leads to path traversal. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-254392. NOTE: The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-1704"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-02-21T18:15:50Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in ZhongBangKeJi CRMEB 5.2.2. It has been declared as critical. This vulnerability affects the function save/delete of the file /adminapi/system/crud. The manipulation leads to path traversal. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-254392. NOTE: The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.",
"id": "GHSA-4x7r-c6x9-qgv3",
"modified": "2024-02-21T18:31:02Z",
"published": "2024-02-21T18:31:02Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-1704"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Echosssy/CVE/blob/main/%E4%BC%97%E9%82%A6%E7%A7%91%E6%8A%80CRMEB%20Mall%20business%20edition%20overrides%20any%20file.docx"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.254392"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.254392"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-4X7W-FRCQ-V4M3
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2020-09-03 20:38 – Updated: 2020-08-31 18:49All versions of @wturyn/swagger-injector are vulnerable to Path Traversal. The package fails to sanitize URLs, allowing attackers to access server files outside of the configured dist folder using relative paths.
Recommendation
No fix is currently available. Consider using an alternative package until a fix is made available.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "npm",
"name": "@wturyn/swagger-injector"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0.0.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2020-08-31T18:49:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "All versions of `@wturyn/swagger-injector` are vulnerable to Path Traversal. The package fails to sanitize URLs, allowing attackers to access server files outside of the configured `dist` folder using relative paths.\n\n\n## Recommendation\n\nNo fix is currently available. Consider using an alternative package until a fix is made available.",
"id": "GHSA-4x7w-frcq-v4m3",
"modified": "2020-08-31T18:49:56Z",
"published": "2020-09-03T20:38:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.npmjs.com/advisories/1173"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [],
"summary": "Path Traversal in @wturyn/swagger-injector"
}
GHSA-4XGF-CPJX-PC3J
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-19 22:10 – Updated: 2026-06-19 22:10Summary
NestedSecretsSettingsSource reads secret values from files in a configured secrets_dir. When secrets_nested_subdir=True, a directory entry inside secrets_dir that is a symbolic link pointing outside secrets_dir is followed, so files outside the configured directory are read into settings values. The same code path bypasses the documented secrets_dir_max_size protection. An attacker or lower-privileged component able to influence entries in the configured secrets directory (for example, a writable or shared secrets mount) can turn this into an unintended local file read into settings and can defeat the advertised loading-size cap. This report does not claim network reachability by itself.
Details
NestedSecretsSettingsSource performed two passes over secrets_dir using two different, inconsistent directory-traversal implementations:
- The size check in
validate_secrets_path()usedPath.glob('**/*'), which does not descend into a symbolically-linked directory. - The loader in
load_secrets()usedglob.iglob(f'{path}/**/*', recursive=True)followed byread_text(), which does follow symlinked directories and reads through the link target.
Because the two passes disagreed on symlinks, a symlinked directory inside secrets_dir whose target lives elsewhere was invisible to the size accounting (counted as 0 bytes) while still being fully read by the loader. This produces two distinct problems:
- Out-of-tree read (CWE-22 / CWE-59). A symlinked directory (or file) inside
secrets_dirthat resolves outside it is followed, and the external file's contents are loaded into the corresponding settings field. secrets_dir_max_sizebypass (CWE-400). The size check never sees the out-of-tree content, so the documented size cap is neither respected nor able to reject the oversized external file. A related amplification exists for cyclic in-tree symlinks, whichglob.iglob(recursive=True)re-traverses, inflating the size accounting and the number of loaded secrets.
Reproduction
In a clean Linux container, with a secrets_dir containing a symlink secrets/db -> /path/outside and an outside/passwd file of 512 bytes, while secrets_dir_max_size=100:
from pydantic import BaseModel
from pydantic_settings import (
BaseSettings,
SettingsConfigDict,
NestedSecretsSettingsSource,
)
class Db(BaseModel):
passwd: str | None = None
class Settings(BaseSettings):
model_config = SettingsConfigDict(
secrets_dir='secrets',
secrets_nested_subdir=True,
secrets_dir_max_size=100, # outside/passwd is 512 bytes
)
db: Db = Db()
@classmethod
def settings_customise_sources(
cls, settings_cls, init_settings, env_settings, dotenv_settings, file_secret_settings
):
return (NestedSecretsSettingsSource(file_secret_settings),)
On affected versions, Settings().db.passwd is populated with the 512-byte out-of-tree file and no SettingsError is raised, even though the file exceeds secrets_dir_max_size.
Impact
Applications that opt into NestedSecretsSettingsSource with secrets_nested_subdir=True and load secrets from a directory whose entries can be influenced by an attacker or a lower-privileged component (for example, a writable or shared secrets mount, or a secrets directory partially populated from untrusted input) are affected. The impact is:
- Confidentiality: files outside the configured
secrets_dircan be read into settings values (local file read). - Integrity / availability of the safeguard: the advertised
secrets_dir_max_sizecap can be bypassed, and cyclic symlinks can inflate resource usage during loading.
The vulnerability requires the ability to place a symbolic link inside the configured secrets directory; it is not remotely reachable on its own. Applications that do not use NestedSecretsSettingsSource, or that point secrets_dir at a directory fully under the application's control, are not affected.
Mitigation
Upgrade to pydantic-settings 2.14.2, which:
- walks the secrets directory explicitly and only descends into directories whose resolved path stays within
secrets_dir, so symlinked directories pointing outside are never followed; - uses a single, cycle-safe iterator for both the size check and the loader, so the size accounting and the loaded set are always consistent and each real directory is visited at most once;
- skips any file whose resolved path escapes
secrets_dir, as defense in depth.
If upgrading is not immediately possible, ensure the configured secrets_dir is fully owned and controlled by the application (no writable or attacker-influenced entries), or avoid secrets_nested_subdir=True.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "PyPI",
"name": "pydantic-settings"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.12.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.14.2"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22",
"CWE-400",
"CWE-59"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-06-19T22:10:42Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Summary\n\n`NestedSecretsSettingsSource` reads secret values from files in a configured `secrets_dir`. When `secrets_nested_subdir=True`, a directory entry inside `secrets_dir` that is a symbolic link pointing **outside** `secrets_dir` is followed, so files outside the configured directory are read into settings values. The same code path bypasses the documented `secrets_dir_max_size` protection. An attacker or lower-privileged component able to influence entries in the configured secrets directory (for example, a writable or shared secrets mount) can turn this into an unintended local file read into settings and can defeat the advertised loading-size cap. This report does not claim network reachability by itself.\n\n### Details\n\n`NestedSecretsSettingsSource` performed two passes over `secrets_dir` using two different, inconsistent directory-traversal implementations:\n\n* The size check in `validate_secrets_path()` used `Path.glob(\u0027**/*\u0027)`, which does **not** descend into a symbolically-linked directory.\n* The loader in `load_secrets()` used `glob.iglob(f\u0027{path}/**/*\u0027, recursive=True)` followed by `read_text()`, which **does** follow symlinked directories and reads through the link target.\n\nBecause the two passes disagreed on symlinks, a symlinked directory inside `secrets_dir` whose target lives elsewhere was invisible to the size accounting (counted as 0 bytes) while still being fully read by the loader. This produces two distinct problems:\n\n1. **Out-of-tree read (CWE-22 / CWE-59).** A symlinked directory (or file) inside `secrets_dir` that resolves outside it is followed, and the external file\u0027s contents are loaded into the corresponding settings field.\n2. **`secrets_dir_max_size` bypass (CWE-400).** The size check never sees the out-of-tree content, so the documented size cap is neither respected nor able to reject the oversized external file. A related amplification exists for cyclic in-tree symlinks, which `glob.iglob(recursive=True)` re-traverses, inflating the size accounting and the number of loaded secrets.\n\n#### Reproduction\n\nIn a clean Linux container, with a `secrets_dir` containing a symlink `secrets/db -\u003e /path/outside` and an `outside/passwd` file of 512 bytes, while `secrets_dir_max_size=100`:\n\n```python\nfrom pydantic import BaseModel\nfrom pydantic_settings import (\n BaseSettings,\n SettingsConfigDict,\n NestedSecretsSettingsSource,\n)\n\n\nclass Db(BaseModel):\n passwd: str | None = None\n\n\nclass Settings(BaseSettings):\n model_config = SettingsConfigDict(\n secrets_dir=\u0027secrets\u0027,\n secrets_nested_subdir=True,\n secrets_dir_max_size=100, # outside/passwd is 512 bytes\n )\n db: Db = Db()\n\n @classmethod\n def settings_customise_sources(\n cls, settings_cls, init_settings, env_settings, dotenv_settings, file_secret_settings\n ):\n return (NestedSecretsSettingsSource(file_secret_settings),)\n```\n\nOn affected versions, `Settings().db.passwd` is populated with the 512-byte out-of-tree file and **no** `SettingsError` is raised, even though the file exceeds `secrets_dir_max_size`.\n\n### Impact\n\nApplications that opt into `NestedSecretsSettingsSource` with `secrets_nested_subdir=True` and load secrets from a directory whose entries can be influenced by an attacker or a lower-privileged component (for example, a writable or shared secrets mount, or a secrets directory partially populated from untrusted input) are affected. The impact is:\n\n* **Confidentiality:** files outside the configured `secrets_dir` can be read into settings values (local file read).\n* **Integrity / availability of the safeguard:** the advertised `secrets_dir_max_size` cap can be bypassed, and cyclic symlinks can inflate resource usage during loading.\n\nThe vulnerability requires the ability to place a symbolic link inside the configured secrets directory; it is not remotely reachable on its own. Applications that do not use `NestedSecretsSettingsSource`, or that point `secrets_dir` at a directory fully under the application\u0027s control, are not affected.\n\n### Mitigation\n\nUpgrade to **pydantic-settings 2.14.2**, which:\n\n* walks the secrets directory explicitly and only descends into directories whose resolved path stays within `secrets_dir`, so symlinked directories pointing outside are never followed;\n* uses a single, cycle-safe iterator for both the size check and the loader, so the size accounting and the loaded set are always consistent and each real directory is visited at most once;\n* skips any file whose resolved path escapes `secrets_dir`, as defense in depth.\n\nIf upgrading is not immediately possible, ensure the configured `secrets_dir` is fully owned and controlled by the application (no writable or attacker-influenced entries), or avoid `secrets_nested_subdir=True`.",
"id": "GHSA-4xgf-cpjx-pc3j",
"modified": "2026-06-19T22:10:42Z",
"published": "2026-06-19T22:10:42Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-settings/security/advisories/GHSA-4xgf-cpjx-pc3j"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-settings"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "pydantic-settings: NestedSecretsSettingsSource follows symlinks outside secrets_dir, enabling local file read and bypassing secrets_dir_max_size"
}
GHSA-4XH3-CV46-PPH4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:23 – Updated: 2023-05-23 15:30A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco SD-WAN vManage Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to conduct path traversal attacks and obtain read access to sensitive files on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of HTTP requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request that contains directory traversal character sequences to the affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to view arbitrary files on the affected system.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-3401"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-07-16T18:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco SD-WAN vManage Software could allow an authenticated, remote attacker to conduct path traversal attacks and obtain read access to sensitive files on an affected system. The vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of HTTP requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted HTTP request that contains directory traversal character sequences to the affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to view arbitrary files on the affected system.",
"id": "GHSA-4xh3-cv46-pph4",
"modified": "2023-05-23T15:30:25Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:23:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-3401"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-vmandowndir-CVGvdKM3"
}
],
"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"
}
]
}
GHSA-4XJ4-JGRG-3VVP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 17:42 – Updated: 2022-05-01 17:42Directory traversal vulnerability in admin/skins.php for @lex Guestbook 4.0.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to create files in arbitrary directories via ".." sequences in the (1) aj_skin and (2) skin_edit parameters. NOTE: this can be leveraged for file inclusion by creating a skin file in the lang directory, then referencing that file via the lang parameter to index.php, which passes a sanity check in livre_include.php.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2007-0205"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-22"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2007-01-11T22:28:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Directory traversal vulnerability in admin/skins.php for @lex Guestbook 4.0.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to create files in arbitrary directories via \"..\" sequences in the (1) aj_skin and (2) skin_edit parameters. NOTE: this can be leveraged for file inclusion by creating a skin file in the lang directory, then referencing that file via the lang parameter to index.php, which passes a sanity check in livre_include.php.",
"id": "GHSA-4xj4-jgrg-3vvp",
"modified": "2022-05-01T17:42:27Z",
"published": "2022-05-01T17:42:27Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2007-0205"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/31397"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/3103"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://acid-root.new.fr/poc/20070107.txt"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/31708"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://osvdb.org/31709"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://securityreason.com/securityalert/2135"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/456218/100/0/threaded"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/21926"
}
],
"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.