CVE-2026-24686VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jan 2026

CVE-2026-24686: theupdateframework go-tuf · Path Traversal

Affects theupdateframework go-tufSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.7 Medium : upgrade to 2.4.1 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.7Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.4.1

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
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 impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 27 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

Upgrade go-tuf and github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf to 2.4.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
theupdateframeworkgo-tuf	Affected >=2.0.0 <2.4.1	Fixed in 2.4.1
Gogithub.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf`pkg:golang/github.com/theupdateframework/go-tuf`Other threats	Affected <2.4.1 >=2.0.0	Fixed in 2.4.1

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade all go-tuf deployments to version 2.4.1 or later, where the vulnerability is patched. Beyond upgrading, organizations should implement strict validation and sanitization of all repository name inputs (`repoName`) to ensure they do not contain directory traversal sequences or other malicious characters. Applications consuming map files should enforce strict source validation and integrity checks to prevent untrusted or tampered map files from being processed. Employing filesystem access controls and running update clients with the least privilege necessary can limit the impact of any successful exploitation. Additionally, monitoring filesystem changes in the update metadata directories and implementing alerting for unexpected file creations or modifications outside expected paths can provide early detection. Organizations should also review their software supply chain security policies to ensure that all components, including update frameworks like go-tuf, are kept up to date and that third-party inputs are properly vetted.

Description

CVE-2026-24686 is a path traversal vulnerability in go-tuf versions 2.0.0 up to but not including 2.4.1. The flaw arises because the map file repository name string (`repoName`) is used directly as a filesystem path component without proper sanitization. An attacker supplying a malicious `repoName` containing traversal sequences (e.g. , '.. /') can cause go-tuf to write metadata files outside the intended cache directory, potentially overwriting or creating files with the permissions of the running process.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of this vulnerability lies in the potential compromise of software update integrity. go-tuf is used to secure software update processes by managing metadata about repositories and updates. If an attacker can exploit this path traversal flaw, they could cause the update client to write malicious or manipulated metadata files outside the intended cache directory. This could lead to the acceptance and installation of unauthorized or tampered software updates, potentially enabling further compromise of systems. While confidentiality is not directly affected, the integrity and trustworthiness of the update mechanism are at risk, which is critical for maintaining secure software supply chains. Organizations relying on go-tuf in their update infrastructure, especially those in sectors with strict software integrity requirements such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, could face increased risk of supply chain attacks. Additionally, the vulnerability requires that the attacker can supply or influence untrusted map files, so environments where update metadata is fetched or processed from external or less trusted sources are particularly vulnerable. The medium CVSS score indicates moderate urgency, but the potential downstream impact on system integrity and operational continuity can be significant.

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 3 Feb 2026, 08:45 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats