CVE-2026-18427 (GCVE-0-2026-18427)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5
Published
2026-08-06 14:52
Modified
2026-08-06 15:44
Severity ?
VLAI Severity ?
EPSS score ?
CWE
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.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @fastify/static | @fastify/static |
Version: 0 ≤ |
{
"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": {
"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"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…