dulwich: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
CVE-2026-42305 is a high-severity improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in dulwich from Jelmer, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, but only if a user takes part, for example by opening a link or file. Affected dulwich versions: >= 0.10.0, < 1.2.5. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.64% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 51% of scored CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Check which version of dulwich you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
- Read the advisory on github.com 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.
- Because the attack needs a user to take part, warn users about unexpected links and files related to this product until it is patched.
Affected products and versions
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
- RequiredA user must take an action such as opening a file or link.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (github.com).
Official description
Dulwich is a pure-Python implementation of the Git file formats and protocols. Versions starting with 0.10.0 and prior to 1.2.5 have an arbitrary file write leading to remote code execution when cloning or checking out a malicious Git repository on Windows. Dulwich's path-element validator accepted tree entries whose filenames contained bytes that Windows interprets as structural path syntax. Contributing configuration bugs made matters worse. The core.protectNTFS and core.protectHFS settings were looked up under a wrong option name and so user-set values were silently ignored, and core.protectNTFS only defaulted to true on Windows (Git upstream has defaulted it to true everywhere since CVE-2019-1353). Both have been corrected. Anyone who clones, fetches, or checks out an untrusted repository with Dulwich on Windows - either through the Dulwich CLI, porcelain.clone, or any downstream tool built on Dulwich - is impacted. POSIX clones are not directly exploitable (on POSIX \ is a literal filename byte), but a POSIX user can unknowingly propagate a malicious tree to Windows consumers via push or re-publication. This issue is fixed in Dulwich 1.2.5. Users should upgrade to 1.2.5 or later. There is no effective pre-patch workaround. On affected versions the core.protectNTFS configuration key was silently ignored, so setting it to true does not mitigate the issue. Users who cannot upgrade should avoid cloning, fetching, or checking out untrusted repositories with Dulwich on Windows. After upgrading the NTFS validator is on by default on every platform, so no additional configuration is required.
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: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in dulwich
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
Recent Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities
- 9.6 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 9.6 Critical severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.