CVE-2026-24469VulnerabilityPublished 24 Jan 2026Updated 26 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-24469: frustratedProton http-server · Path Traversal

Affects frustratedProton http-serverSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 50% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 24 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 2026-10-25.

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
frustratedProtonhttp-server	Affected <=1.0	Fixed in–
GitHubfrustratedproton/http-server`pkg:github/frustratedproton/http-server`Other threats	Affected <=1.0	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. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the server side to reject or properly normalize any URL paths containing '../' or other traversal sequences before processing. 2. Employ a whitelist approach for allowed file paths or extensions to restrict accessible resources. 3. Deploy Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) configured to detect and block path traversal attack patterns in HTTP requests. 4. Run the http-server with the least privileges necessary and isolate it within a sandbox or container environment to limit filesystem exposure. 5. Monitor server logs for suspicious requests containing traversal sequences or unusual file access patterns. 6. If possible, disable or restrict access to sensitive directories and files on the server filesystem. 7. Engage with the vendor or community to obtain patches or updates as they become available and plan for timely deployment. 8. Conduct regular security assessments and penetration testing to identify and remediate similar vulnerabilities proactively.

Description

C++ HTTP Server is an HTTP/1.1 server built to handle client connections and serve HTTP requests. Versions 1.0 and below are vulnerable to Path Traversal via the RequestHandler::handleRequest method. This flaw allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to read arbitrary files from the server's filesystem by crafting a malicious HTTP GET request containing ../ sequences. The application fails to sanitize the filename variable derived from the user-controlled URL path, directly concatenating it to the files_directory base path and enabling traversal outside the intended root. No patch was available at the time of publication.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to data confidentiality. Attackers exploiting this flaw can access sensitive files such as configuration files, credentials, or proprietary information stored on the server. This exposure can lead to further compromise, including lateral movement within networks or targeted attacks on critical infrastructure. Organizations in sectors like finance, healthcare, government, and critical infrastructure are particularly vulnerable due to the sensitivity of their data. The lack of authentication and user interaction requirements lowers the barrier for attackers, increasing the likelihood of exploitation. Additionally, the absence of a patch means organizations must rely on mitigations or workarounds, potentially leaving systems exposed for extended periods. The vulnerability could also undermine compliance with European data protection regulations such as GDPR if personal or sensitive data is exposed. Overall, the threat could result in reputational damage, regulatory penalties, and operational disruptions if exploited.

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

github.com/frustratedProton/http-server/security/advisories/GHSA-qp54-6gfq-3gff (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Jan 2026, 08:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats