@fastify/reply-from: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
CVE-2026-117518 is a high-severity improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in @fastify/reply-from, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.2 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 12.8.1 as the first without the flaw, so updating @fastify/reply-from to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.46% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update @fastify/reply-from to 12.8.1 or a later version.
- Read the advisory on cna.openjsf.org for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| @fastify/reply-from | @fastify/reply-from | before 12.8.1 | 12.8.1 |
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.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- LowLimited modification of data is possible.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N. Scored by CNA.
Official description
@fastify/reply-from is a Fastify plugin that forwards requests to an upstream HTTP server. In versions up to and including 12.8.0, the plugin validated proxy paths against forward-slash dot-segments only and then built the target with the WHATWG URL parser, which normalizes a backslash and its percent-encoded form to a forward slash on the http, https, ws, and wss schemes. A path that uses backslash dot-segments therefore bypasses the traversal check and resolves to a different upstream path, so an application that scopes proxying to an upstream prefix, or relies on route guards in front of the forwarding call, can have an unauthenticated request escape the intended prefix and reach other upstream endpoints. The resulting access to unintended upstream resources is primarily a confidentiality impact with limited integrity impact. The issue is fixed in @fastify/reply-from 12.8.1, where the path is normalized and any segment resolving to a single or double dot, along with control characters and ambiguous whitespace, is rejected before the URL is constructed, and users should upgrade to 12.8.1 or later. There is no workaround other than upgrading.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- 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.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth.
More Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities (CWE-22)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
References
Advisories
Other vulnerabilities in @fastify/reply-from
- 7.4 High severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
- 8.6 High severity
Recent Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities
- 8.4 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
- 8.3 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.