Open-Source Security Intelligence

Know every vulnerability
before it knows you.

DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.

Search

GHSA-jqc5-w2xx-5vq4

MediumCVSS 4.7 / 10
Published Jan 26, 2026·Last modified Feb 4, 2026
Affected Components(0)

No affected components available

Description

Security Vulnerability: Path Traversal in TAP 4 Multirepo Client

Summary

go-tuf's TAP 4 Multirepo Client uses the map file repository name string (repoName) as a filesystem path component when selecting the local metadata cache directory. If an application accepts a map file from an untrusted source, an attacker can supply a repoName containing traversal (e.g., ../escaped-repo) and cause go-tuf to create directories and write the root metadata file outside the intended LocalMetadataDir cache base, within the running process's filesystem permissions.

Affected Component

| Field | Value | |-------|-------| | File | metadata/multirepo/multirepo.go | | Function | (*MultiRepoClient) initTUFClients() error | | Callsite | metadataDir := filepath.Join(client.Config.LocalMetadataDir, repoName) (around line 129 at the pinned commit) |

Impact

When the TAP 4 map file content is attacker-controlled, this enables arbitrary file write relative to the process permissions (via metadata persistence during client initialization). This can be used to overwrite files writable by the process (for example, configuration files in writable directories) and may enable further compromise depending on the deployment environment.

Note: Exploitability is deployment-dependent. If the map file is always local and trusted (not attacker-controlled), this reduces to a misconfiguration risk rather than a remotely triggerable issue.

Attacker Model

  • Attacker can cause the application to load a TAP 4 map file whose repositories keys are attacker-controlled (for example: fetched from a URL, supply-chain substituted, or otherwise attacker-influenced input).
  • Local caching is enabled (DisableLocalCache=false) and the configured LocalMetadataDir is writable by the running process.

Claim Ceiling: HIGH when the map file is attacker-controlled; if the map file is always local and trusted, this is closer to a configuration footgun and likely lands as MEDIUM/LOW.

| Field | Value | |-------|-------| | Affected Versions | ≤ 2.4.0 | | Verified On | Commit bde5f18dc95dfac365fc452ee4e278e5fd66d4b4 (tag v2.4.0) |

Note: First affected version has not been bisected.

Reproduction

Attachments include poc.zip with:

  • canonical.log (contains [CALLSITE_HIT], [PROOF_MARKER])
  • control.log (contains [CALLSITE_HIT], [NC_MARKER], does not contain [PROOF_MARKER])
  • fix.patch (minimal validation sketch)

Expected: Multirepo repository names are treated as identifiers; a TAP 4 map file containing traversal or absolute paths is rejected (or safely normalized so that all writes stay under LocalMetadataDir).

Actual: A traversal repoName escapes LocalMetadataDir and go-tuf persists root.json under the escaped path during initialization.

Run Local Repro

rm -rf _poc
mkdir -p _poc
unzip -q -o poc.zip -d _poc
cd _poc/poc
make canonical
make control

Workarounds

  1. Treat TAP 4 map files as trusted configuration only (do not fetch from untrusted sources).
  2. Validate repo names before passing the map file to go-tuf (reject absolute paths, path separators, and traversal components like . / ..).
  3. If acceptable for the application, disable local caching to avoid writing metadata to disk (DisableLocalCache=true).

Suggested Remediation

Validate multirepo repository names as identifiers (not paths) before using them in filepath.Join. Reject:

  • Absolute paths
  • Path separators (/ and \)
  • Traversal components (. and ..)

If it is important to accept a wider set of repo names, a safer alternative is to map repo names to a stable, validated directory name (for example via encoding or hashing) and to ensure all writes stay under the cache base directory.

Triage Questions

  1. Is the TAP 4 map file expected to ever be fetched from untrusted sources in supported deployments?
  2. Should invalid repo names be treated as a hard error (reject initialization), or as a soft error (skip that repository entry)?

Attachments


Reported by: Oleh

Risk Scores
Base Score
4.7

The vulnerability requires local access to the device to be exploited. It is difficult for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability and may require special conditions. An attacker needs basic access or low-level privileges. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a high impact on the integrity of the data.

Threat Intelligence
4.3

Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.

EPSS
0.21%

The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.

Exploit
Not available

We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.

Browse More

Scan your project

Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.

Checkout DevGuard