VulnerabilityPublished 8 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-35525: harttle liquidjs · UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following

Affects harttle liquidjsSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.2 High : upgrade to 10.25.3 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.2High

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 10.25.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: Present
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: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
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 8 Apr 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 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 10.25.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
harttleliquidjs	Affected <10.25.3	Fixed in 10.25.3
npmharttle/liquidjs`pkg:npm/harttle/liquidjs`Other threats	Affected <10.25.3	Fixed in 10.25.3

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

AI-suggested

The vulnerability is fixed in LiquidJS version 10.25.3. Users should upgrade to version 10.25.3 or later to resolve this issue. Since no official vendor advisory or patch link is provided, verify the upgrade from the official project repository or release notes. Until upgraded, restrict the ability of untrusted users to place or modify template files or symbolic links under the trusted template roots to mitigate exploitation risk.

Description

LiquidJS is a Shopify / GitHub Pages compatible template engine in pure JavaScript. Prior to 10.25.3, for {% include %}, {% render %}, and {% layout %}, LiquidJS checks whether the candidate path is inside the configured partials or layouts roots before reading it. That check is path-based, not realpath-based. Because of that, a file like partials/link.liquid passes the directory containment check as long as its pathname is under the allowed root. If link.liquid is actually a symlink to a file outside the allowed root, the filesystem follows the symlink when the file is opened and LiquidJS renders the external target. So the restriction is applied to the path string that was requested, not to the file that is actually read. This matters in environments where an attacker can place templates or otherwise influence files under a trusted template root, including uploaded themes, extracted archives, mounted content, or repository-controlled template trees. This vulnerability is fixed in 10.25.3.

Impact

An attacker with the ability to place or influence template files within allowed directories can cause LiquidJS to render arbitrary files outside those directories by leveraging symbolic links. This may lead to unauthorized disclosure of sensitive files or unintended template rendering. The CVSS 4.0 score is 8.2 (high severity), indicating network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges required, no user interaction, but high impact on confidentiality. No known exploits in the wild are reported.

Summary

LiquidJS versions before 10.25.3 perform path-based checks for template inclusion directives ({% include %}, {% render %}, {% layout %}) to ensure files are within configured partials or layouts roots. However, these checks do not resolve symbolic links (realpath), allowing a symlink inside the allowed root to point to a file outside it. When LiquidJS opens the file, it follows the symlink and renders the external file, bypassing directory restrictions. This can be exploited in environments where attackers can place or influence template files under trusted roots, such as uploaded themes or repository-controlled templates. The vulnerability is tracked as CWE-61 (Improper Restriction of Symbolic Links).

CWE-61UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following (opens in a new tab)
Compound weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product, when opening a file or directory, does not sufficiently account for when the file is a symbolic link that resolves to a target outside of the intended control sphere. This could allow an attacker to cause the product to operate on unauthorized files.
Implementation
Symbolic link attacks often occur when a program creates a tmp directory that stores files/links. Access to the directory should be restricted to the program as to prevent attackers from manipulating the files.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Follow the principle of least privilege when assigning access rights to entities in a software system.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging Race Conditions via Symbolic Links (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 8 Apr 2026, 20:06 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-61

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats