CVE-2026-25766VulnerabilityPublished 19 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-25766: labstack echo · Path Traversal

Affects labstack echoSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 5.0.3 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 32% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.0.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
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 19 Feb 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

Upgrade labstack echo to 5.0.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
labstackecho	Affected >=5.0.0 <5.0.3	Fixed in 5.0.3

AI-suggested

1. Upgrade Echo to version 5.0.3 or later, where this vulnerability is fixed. 2. If immediate upgrade is not possible, implement strict input validation and sanitization on all static file requests to reject any paths containing backslashes or traversal sequences such as '..\\' or '..//'. 3. Configure the web server or reverse proxy to restrict access to sensitive directories and files outside the static root. 4. Use a custom filesystem implementation or middleware that properly normalizes paths considering Windows path separators before file access. 5. Employ runtime application self-protection (RASP) or web application firewalls (WAFs) with rules to detect and block path traversal attempts involving backslashes. 6. Conduct thorough security reviews of static file serving configurations and ensure sensitive files are not stored within or accessible from the static root directory. 7. Monitor logs for suspicious requests containing traversal patterns and respond promptly to potential exploitation attempts.

Description

Echo is a Go web framework. In versions 5.0.0 through 5.0.2 on Windows, Echo’s `middleware.Static` using the default filesystem allows path traversal via backslashes, enabling unauthenticated remote file read outside the static root. In `middleware/static.go`, the requested path is unescaped and normalized with `path.Clean` (URL semantics). `path.Clean` does not treat `\` as a path separator, so `..\` sequences remain in the cleaned path. The resulting path is then passed to `currentFS.Open(...)`. When the filesystem is left at the default (nil), Echo uses `defaultFS` which calls `os.Open` (`echo.go:792`). On Windows, `os.Open` treats `\` as a path separator and resolves `..\`, allowing traversal outside the static root. Version 5.0.3 fixes the issue.

Impact

This vulnerability allows unauthenticated remote attackers to read arbitrary files outside the intended static directory on Windows servers running vulnerable Echo versions. The confidentiality of sensitive files such as configuration files, source code, credentials, or other private data may be compromised. Although the vulnerability does not affect data integrity or availability, unauthorized file disclosure can lead to further attacks, including information leakage, reconnaissance, or exploitation of other vulnerabilities. Organizations using Echo on Windows for web applications that serve static content are at risk, especially if sensitive files are accessible or improperly segregated. The impact is limited to Windows environments due to the path separator behavior. Since no authentication or user interaction is required, exploitation can be automated and performed remotely over the network, increasing risk. However, the medium CVSS score reflects that the attack complexity is low but the impact is limited to confidentiality.

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 19 Feb 2026, 16:43 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats