CVE-2026-52726VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 29 Oct 2026

Dvc: Dulwich's submodule path traversal

Affects dvcSource GCVE Database

Compare

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-52726· High 7.5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 3.67.1_6 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 06:59 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 38% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 3.67.1_6

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

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

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: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 Jun 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 29 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 dvc to 3.67.1_6.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewdvc`pkg:brew/dvc`Other threats	Affected >=3.61.0 <3.67.1_6	Fixed in 3.67.1_6

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

Description

### Summary `dulwich.porcelain.submodule_update`, and by extension `porcelain.clone(..., recurse_submodules=True)`, materializes attacker-controlled submodule paths from a crafted upstream repository without path validation. A malicious `.gitmodules` plus a matching tree gitlink whose `path` is `.git/hooks` (or any other directory inside the parent repository's `.git` directory) causes the attacker's submodule tree contents to be written directly into the victim's `.git/hooks/` directory, preserving executable mode bits. The dropped executables are then run by any subsequent `git` or `dulwich` command that invokes the matching hook, resulting in arbitrary code execution. This is the dulwich equivalent of the upstream Git fixes for CVE-2024-32002 / CVE-2024-32004, which were never propagated into dulwich's separately implemented submodule porcelain. ### Affected - **Package:** `dulwich` (PyPI) - **Affected versions:** `>=0.23.2, <1.2.5` - **Affected platforms:** all (Linux, macOS, Windows). Exploitation does not require a case-insensitive or NTFS filesystem, because the path written is a literal `.git/hooks` rather than a case- or short-name-aliased form. Affected entry points: - `dulwich.porcelain.submodule_update(repo, init=True, recursive=True)` - `dulwich.porcelain.clone(source, target, recurse_submodules=True)` - `dulwich submodule update` CLI / `dulwich clone --recurse-submodules` CLI ### Vulnerable code The submodule path from the tree's gitlink entry (and matching `.gitmodules`) is consumed without validation in [`dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py#L154-L234). The attacker-controlled `path` enters the loop from `iter_cached_submodules` ([`submodule.py#L154-L168`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py#L154-L168)): ```python for path, target_sha in submodules_to_update: path_str = ( path.decode(DEFAULT_ENCODING) if isinstance(path, bytes) else path ) submodule_name: bytes | None = None for sm_path, sm_url, sm_name in read_submodules(gitmodules_path): if sm_path == path: submodule_name = sm_name break if not submodule_name: continue ``` It flows unchecked into `os.path.join` and the filesystem ([`submodule.py#L187-L188`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py#L187-L188)): ```python submodule_path = os.path.join(r.path, path_str) submodule_git_dir = os.path.join(r.controldir(), "modules", path_str) ``` Finally, the attacker tree's contents are materialized into that directory via `build_index_from_tree` with no `validate_path_element` argument, defaulting to the lax validator ([`submodule.py#L229-L234`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py#L229-L234)): ```python build_index_from_tree( submodule_path, sub_repo.index_path(), sub_repo.object_store, tree_id, ) ``` Three issues compound: 1. `path_str` originates from the parent repository's tree gitlink entry (attacker-controlled) and is never validated against `.git`, `..`, or other path-traversal patterns. The same value is read from the attacker-supplied `.gitmodules` blob via [`read_submodules`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/config.py#L1637-L1665), which also performs no validation. 2. `submodule_path = os.path.join(r.path, path_str)` therefore resolves to an attacker-chosen directory anywhere on disk (e.g. `<worktree>/.git/hooks`). 3. [`build_index_from_tree`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/index.py#L2034-L2044) is called without `validate_path_element`, so it defaults to `validate_path_element_default`, which only rejects literal `.git`, `.`, and `..`. It does not refuse a `root_path` that is itself inside the parent's `.git` directory, and it honors the attacker tree's file modes including executable bits (`0o100755`). ### Reachability A direct production call path from a user invocation: `porcelain.clone(source, target, recurse_submodules=True)` at [`dulwich/porcelain/__init__.py:1548-1551`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/__init__.py#L1548-L1551) calls `submodule_update(repo, init=True, recursive=True)` once the parent clone completes, reaching the unsanitized loop at [`submodule.py#L154-L234`](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/blob/8efb7d19eac519cd7fac39e79ca354327897e133/dulwich/porcelain/submodule.py#L154-L234). The CLI command `dulwich clone --recurse-submodules <url>` reaches the same sink via [`dulwich

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…