VulnerabilityPublished 10 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-30952: harttle liquidjs · Path Traversal

Affects harttle liquidjsSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.7 High : upgrade to 10.25.0 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.7High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 47% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 10.25.0

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

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

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: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
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.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
Public exploit code: GitHub proofs of concept
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), GitHub proofs of concept, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 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 liquidjs and harttle/liquidjs to 10.25.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
harttleliquidjs	Affected <10.25.0	Fixed in 10.25.0
npmharttle/liquidjs`pkg:npm/harttle/liquidjs`Other threats	Affected <10.25.0	Fixed in 10.25.0

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-30952, organizations should immediately upgrade all liquidjs instances to version 10.25.0 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed. Additionally, restrict or sanitize any user input that can influence template file paths, especially when dynamicPartials is enabled. Disable dynamicPartials if dynamic file inclusion is not required. Implement strict allowlisting of template directories and enforce path normalization to prevent traversal sequences. Employ runtime monitoring and alerting for suspicious file access patterns. Conduct code reviews and security testing on templates that accept user input to ensure no arbitrary file inclusion is possible. For environments where upgrading is not immediately feasible, consider isolating the application with least privilege file system permissions to limit the impact of potential exploitation. Finally, maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans to quickly recover from any compromise.

Description

liquidjs is a Shopify / GitHub Pages compatible template engine in pure JavaScript. Prior to 10.25.0, the layout, render, and include tags allow arbitrary file access via absolute paths (either as string literals or through Liquid variables, the latter require dynamicPartials: true, which is the default). This poses a security risk when malicious users are allowed to control the template content or specify the filepath to be included as a Liquid variable. This vulnerability is fixed in 10.25.0.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-30952 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive files on servers running vulnerable versions of liquidjs. Attackers can read arbitrary files outside the intended template directories, potentially exposing secrets such as environment variables, private keys, database credentials, or proprietary source code. This compromises confidentiality and can facilitate further attacks like privilege escalation or lateral movement. Since the vulnerability requires no authentication or user interaction, it can be exploited by remote attackers with network access to the application. The integrity and availability of the system are not directly affected, but the breach of confidentiality can have severe business and compliance consequences. Organizations relying on liquidjs for e-commerce, content management, or static site generation are at risk, especially if they allow user-supplied template content or file paths. The widespread use of liquidjs in Shopify-compatible environments and GitHub Pages increases the global attack surface. Although no active exploits are known, the vulnerability’s high CVSS score and ease of exploitation make it a critical risk that demands prompt remediation.

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 10 Mar 2026, 20:59 UTC

Public exploits and detectionGitHub proofs of concept

WeaknessesCWE-22

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats