CVE-2026-22786VulnerabilityPublished 12 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-22786: flipped-aurora gin-vue-admin · Unrestricted File Upload

Affects flipped-aurora gin-vue-adminSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.3 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

7.3High

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

EPSS: 1.0% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 65% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: High
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: High
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: High: The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable system allowing full access to the vulnerable system’s settings and files.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 12 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: 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 2026-10-26.

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.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
flipped-auroragin-vue-admin	Affected <=2.8.7	Fixed in–
GitHubflipped-aurora/gin-vue-admin`pkg:github/flipped-aurora/gin-vue-admin`Other threats	Affected <=2.8.7	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

1. Immediately upgrade gin-vue-admin to a version later than 2.8.7 once a patch is available from the vendor or community. 2. Until a patch is applied, restrict file upload permissions strictly to trusted users and roles to minimize exposure. 3. Implement server-side validation and sanitization of all file upload parameters, particularly the filename, to reject any directory traversal sequences such as '../' or absolute paths. 4. Employ application-layer controls to enforce allowed file types and sizes to reduce risk of malicious payloads. 5. Use containerization or sandboxing to isolate the file upload directory from critical system paths. 6. Monitor file system activity for unusual file creation or modification outside expected directories. 7. Conduct regular audits of uploaded files and system logs to detect potential exploitation attempts. 8. Harden server configurations to prevent execution of uploaded files in upload directories. 9. Educate developers and administrators about secure file handling practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities. 10. Deploy web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules to detect and block path traversal attack patterns targeting the vulnerable endpoint.

Description

CVE-2026-22786 is a high-severity vulnerability in gin-vue-admin versions up to 2.8.7 that allows an attacker with file upload privileges to perform unrestricted file uploads via a path traversal flaw. The vulnerability exists in the breakpoint resume upload functionality where the filename parameter is concatenated directly with a base directory path without validation, enabling directory traversal attacks. Exploitation can lead to arbitrary file writes anywhere on the server filesystem, potentially resulting in code execution, data compromise, or service disruption. No user interaction or authentication bypass is required beyond having upload privileges. Although no known exploits are reported in the wild yet, the vulnerability's characteristics make it a significant risk for organizations using this software. European organizations relying on gin-vue-admin for backend management should prioritize patching or mitigating this issue to prevent potential attacks. Countries with higher adoption of gin-vue-admin or critical infrastructure using it are at greater risk. Immediate mitigation includes restricting file upload permissions, validating and sanitizing file paths, and monitoring for suspicious file activity.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk especially for those using gin-vue-admin as part of their internal or external management infrastructure. Successful exploitation can lead to arbitrary file writes, enabling attackers to deploy web shells or malware, escalate privileges, exfiltrate sensitive data, or disrupt services. This can result in data breaches, operational downtime, and reputational damage. Critical sectors such as finance, healthcare, government, and manufacturing that rely on gin-vue-admin for administrative interfaces are particularly vulnerable. Given the high severity and ease of exploitation by any user with upload privileges, the threat could facilitate lateral movement within networks and persistent footholds. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently provides a window for proactive mitigation. However, the vulnerability's presence in open-source software used globally means European organizations must act swiftly to prevent potential targeted attacks or opportunistic exploitation by cybercriminals or state-sponsored actors.

Summary

CVE-2026-22786 affects the flipped-aurora gin-vue-admin project, a backend management system built on Vue.js and Gin framework. Versions up to 2.8.7 contain a path traversal vulnerability in the breakpoint resume upload feature. Specifically, the vulnerability resides in the MakeFile function within breakpoint_continue.go, where the filename parameter received via the /fileUploadAndDownload/breakpointContinueFinish API endpoint is concatenated directly with the base directory path './fileDir/' using os.OpenFile() without any sanitization or validation against directory traversal sequences such as '../'. This lack of validation allows an attacker with legitimate file upload privileges to craft filenames containing traversal sequences, enabling them to write files outside the intended directory, potentially anywhere on the server filesystem. This can lead to arbitrary file upload, allowing attackers to place malicious files, overwrite critical files, or implant web shells, which can compromise confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the system. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-434 (Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type) and CWE-22 (Path Traversal). The CVSS v4.0 score is 7.3 (high severity), reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, no user interaction, but requiring privileges to upload files. No known exploits have been reported in the wild yet, but the vulnerability's nature makes it a prime target for exploitation once weaponized. The issue affects all deployments using gin-vue-admin versions up to 2.8.7, which are commonly used in enterprise and government backend management systems.

CWE-434Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #12OWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product allows the upload or transfer of dangerous file types that are automatically processed within its environment.
Architecture and Design
Generate a new, unique filename for an uploaded file instead of using the user-supplied filename, so that no external input is used at all.
Architecture and Design · 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.
Architecture and Design
Consider storing the uploaded files outside of the web document root entirely. Then, use other mechanisms to deliver the files dynamically.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Web Service Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
File Upload (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.1.5 (opens in a new tab)
V12.2.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #6OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
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.
Implementation · 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.
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…
Implementation · 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).
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Path Traversal (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls (opens in a new tab)
Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding (opens in a new tab)
Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding (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 21 Jan 2026, 03:01 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-434, CWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats