<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-10T12:20:54.805097+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-107716</id>
    <title>fkie_cve-2026-107716</title>
    <updated>2026-10-10T12:20:55.149638+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>Banks generates meaningful LLM prompts using a simple template language. Prior to 2.5.1, Banks DirectoryPromptRegistry does not reject symbolic links for index.json or discovered and existing .jinja prompt files. In an application where untrusted users can influence a prompt directory, DirectoryPromptRegistry._scan() and DirectoryPromptRegistry.get() can follow a link outside the registry root and disclose a file, while DirectoryPromptRegistry.set(), DirectoryPromptRegistry._save(), and DirectoryPromptRegistry._load() can read or overwrite an external link target. The issue requires attacker influence over the registry directory or its extracted contents. This issue is fixed in version 2.5.1.</p>
      </div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-107716"/>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/ghsa-556j-vv39-8rqv</id>
    <title>GHSA-556j-vv39-8rqv — Banks: Symlink traversal and arbitrary file disclosure/overwrite in DirectoryPromptRegistry</title>
    <updated>2026-10-10T12:20:55.149778+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> PyPI: banks</p>
<p>### Summary
In `banks.registries.DirectoryPromptRegistry`, prompt file paths and the index file (`index.json`) do not refuse symbolic links. When a prompt directory contains or accepts untrusted files (e.g. unpacked archives, shared repositories, or multi-tenant folders), symbolic links pointing outside the registry root can be used to disclose arbitrary files via `_scan()` / `get()` or overwrite arbitrary files via `set()` / `_save()`.</p>
<p>### Details
Following PR #77, `DirectoryPromptRegistry` validates path resolution for prompt names. However:
1. `self._index_path` (`index.json`) is not checked for symbolic links. A symlink pointing to an external target (e.g. a configuration file) will be overwritten by `_save()` upon `reg.set()`, or read via `_load()`.
2. In `_scan()`, discovered `.jinja` files are opened and indexed without checking if `path.is_symlink()` or if the resolved path escapes the registry root. A symlink pointing to a sensitive file outside the root is read and indexed.
3. In `set()`, `prompt_file.write_text(...)` is called without checking if `prompt_file` is an existing symbolic link pointing outside the root.</p>
<p>### Impact
Arbitrary file disclosure (CWE-59 / CWE-200) and arbitrary file overwrite (CWE-59) in applications where prompt directories can be influenced by untrusted users or extracted from archives.</p>
<p>### Proof of Concept
```python
import os
from pathlib import Path
from banks.registries.directory import DirectoryPromptRegistry, DEFAULT_INDEX_NAME
fro…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/ghsa-556j-vv39-8rqv"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
