SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG): External Control of File Name or Path
CVE-2026-114425 is a critical-severity external control of file name or path vulnerability in SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG) from SeppMail, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 9.2 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 15.1.1 as the first without the flaw, so updating SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG) to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.33% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.
What to do
- Update SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG) to 15.1.1 or a later version.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| SEPPmail | SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG) | before 15.1.1 | 15.1.1 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Attack requirements
- PresentThe target must be in a specific state or configuration for the attack to work.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
- Confidentiality (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Integrity (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
- Availability (other systems)
- NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (ncsc.ch).
Official description
SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before 15.1.1 trusts a file path supplied in externally provided Large File Transfer attachment metadata. An unauthenticated remote sender can cause the mail-processing worker to disclose, move, or delete an accessible regular file when LFT is enabled and the message reaches an affected secure-mail processing path. The validated workers ran as root.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: External Control of File Name or Path
The product allows user input to control or influence paths or file names that are used in filesystem operations.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- When the set of filenames is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to inbox.txt and ID 2 could map to profile.txt. Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap provide this capability.
- Run your code in a jail or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict all access to files within a particular directory. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
- 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 entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
More External Control of File Name or Path vulnerabilities (CWE-73)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Other vulnerabilities in SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway (SEG)
- 8.7 High severity
- 9.2 Critical severity
- 8.3 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
Recent External Control of File Name or Path vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 9.9 Critical severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.