VulnerabilityPublished 9 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-119298: Overwrite-confirmation bypass via a crafted "croc-stdin-" filename on receive

Affects github.com/schollz/croc/v11Source GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-119298· Medium 4.2

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.2 Medium : upgrade to 11.5.2 when convenient.

Data as of 9 Nov 2026, 23:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.2Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	4.2

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 23% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 11.5.2

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Oct 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 9 Nov 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade github.com/schollz/croc/v11 to 11.5.2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc/v11	Affected <11.5.2	Fixed in 11.5.2
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc/v10	Affected <=10.7.0	Fixed in–
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc/v9	Affected <=9.6.17	Fixed in–
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc/v8	Affected <=8.6.12	Fixed in–
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc/v6	Affected <=6.4.11	Fixed in–
Gogithub.com/schollz/croc	Affected <=3.0.6	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

A patch is available in croc version 11.5.2 that corrects the overwrite confirmation bypass by properly restricting the exemption to actual text transfers rather than relying on filename prefixes. Users should upgrade to version 11.5.2 or later to mitigate this vulnerability. No additional mitigation steps are required if the patch is applied.

Description

Croc is a peer-to-peer file transfer tool that has a vulnerability allowing an attacker to bypass the overwrite confirmation prompt on the receiving side by using filenames starting with 'croc-stdin-'. This bypass enables silent overwriting, truncation, or replacement of existing files, including symlink substitution, without user confirmation. The flaw arises because the overwrite prompt is suppressed based solely on the filename prefix rather than the transfer type, allowing any sender to exploit this behavior. The issue affects multiple versions prior to 11.5.2 and was introduced by a design decision to avoid prompts for croc's internal text-transfer artifacts. A fix is available in version 11.5.2.

Impact

An attacker who can send files to a croc receiver can bypass the overwrite confirmation prompt by naming files with the 'croc-stdin-' prefix. This allows silent overwriting, truncation, or replacement of existing files, including creating symlinks that could redirect file operations. The impact is limited to integrity and availability, as files can be replaced or removed without user consent. There is no confidentiality impact reported. The vulnerability requires user interaction (receiving the file) and has high attack complexity.

Summary

The vulnerability in croc (CVE-2026-119298) involves the receive-side logic that decides whether to prompt the user before overwriting or resuming an existing file. The code suppresses the overwrite prompt if the filename starts with 'croc-stdin-', a prefix originally intended to exempt internal text-transfer artifacts from confirmation prompts. However, this check is based solely on the filename prefix, not on whether the transfer is actually a text transfer. Consequently, an attacker can send a file named 'croc-stdin-<existing-filename>' to silently overwrite or replace files in the receiver's directory without confirmation. This includes removing existing files and substituting symlinks. The flaw affects versions before 11.5.2, where the patch introduces proper handling to prevent this bypass. The vulnerability has a CVSS 3.1 score of 4.2 (medium severity) with network attack vector, high attack complexity, no privileges required, user interaction required, and limited impact on integrity and availability.

CWE-73External Control of File Name or Path (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product allows user input to control or influence paths or file names that are used in filesystem operations.
Architecture and Design
When the set of filenames is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt".
Architecture and Design · Operation
Run your code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict all access to files within a particular directory.
Architecture and Design
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…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
Leverage Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
URL Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 9 Nov 2026, 23:20 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-73

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats