VulnerabilityPublished 1 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-5258: Sanster IOPaint · Path Traversal

Affects Sanster IOPaintSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

Base metrics

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

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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: 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to 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.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 1 Apr 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
CVSS exploit maturity: proof of concept public
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), CVSS vector, 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
SansterIOPaint	Affected =1.5.3	Fixed in–
PyPIsanster/iopaint`pkg:pypi/sanster/iopaint`Other threats	Affected =1.5.3	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Implement strict input validation and sanitization on the filename parameter to prevent directory traversal sequences such as '../'.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) or intrusion prevention systems (IPS) with rules designed to detect and block path traversal attempts targeting the vulnerable endpoint.
Restrict file system permissions for the application process to limit access only to necessary directories, minimizing the impact of potential traversal.
Monitor logs for suspicious requests containing directory traversal patterns and respond promptly to detected attempts.
If possible, isolate the Sanster IOPaint service in a segmented network zone to reduce exposure.
Engage in active threat hunting for signs of exploitation, especially given the public availability of exploit code.
Contact Sanster for updates or patches and apply them immediately once available.
Consider temporary mitigation by disabling or restricting access to the vulnerable File Manager component if feasible.
Educate development and security teams about secure coding practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities in future releases.

Description

A vulnerability was found in Sanster IOPaint 1.5.3. Impacted is the function _get_file of the file iopaint/file_manager/file_manager.py of the component File Manager. Performing a manipulation of the argument filename results in path traversal. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-5258 is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information due to path traversal, which can compromise confidentiality and potentially integrity if configuration or credential files are exposed or modified. Attackers can remotely exploit this vulnerability without authentication or user interaction, increasing the likelihood of attacks. This can lead to data breaches, intellectual property theft, or further system compromise if sensitive files are leveraged for privilege escalation or lateral movement. The vulnerability does not directly affect availability but could indirectly impact system stability if critical files are accessed or manipulated. Organizations relying on Sanster IOPaint 1.5.3, especially those handling sensitive or regulated data, face increased risk of compliance violations and reputational damage. The absence of vendor response and patches prolongs exposure, necessitating immediate mitigation. The medium severity score reflects the balance between ease of exploitation and the limited scope of impact, but the presence of public exploit code elevates the threat level.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…