Pathling is a set of tools that make it easier to use FHIR and clinical terminology within…
CVE-2026-47664 is a high-severity improper input validation vulnerability in pathling from Aehrc, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.6 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. Affected pathling versions: < 2.0.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.21% 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
- Check which version of pathling 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.
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.
- Attack requirements
- NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- 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)
- NoneNo 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:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/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 (github.com).
Official description
Pathling is a set of tools that make it easier to use FHIR and clinical terminology within health data analytics. Prior to version 2.0.0 of Pathling Server, the `$import-pnp` operation in Pathling Server accepts a caller-supplied `exportUrl` and uses it as the remote FHIR Bulk Export endpoint without constraining it to a trusted source. When PNP credentials are configured, Pathling builds a credentialed bulk-export client targeting the caller-chosen host, downloads manifest-selected files, and then reclassifies those staged files as trusted local `file://` imports - bypassing the configured `allowableSources` allowlist that protects the ordinary `$import` operation. This is fixed in Pathling Server 2.0.0. As a workaround, disable the `$import-pnp` operation (`pathling.operations.importPnpEnabled=false`) or do not configure PNP credentials.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Consider using language-theoretic security (LangSec) techniques that characterize inputs using a formal language and build recognizers for that language. This effectively requires parsing to be a distinct layer that effectively enforces a boundary between raw input and internal data representations, instead of allowing parser code to be scattered throughout the program, where it could be subject to errors or inconsistencies that create weaknesses.
- Use an input validation framework such as Struts or the OWASP ESAPI Validation API. Note that using a framework does not automatically address all input validation problems; be mindful of weaknesses that could arise from misusing the framework itself (CWE-1173).
- Understand all the potential areas where untrusted inputs can enter the product, including but not limited to: parameters or arguments, cookies, anything read from the network, environment variables, reverse DNS lookups, query results, request headers, URL components, e-mail, files, filenames, databases, and any external systems that provide data to the application. Remember that such inputs may be obtained indirectly through API calls.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other vulnerabilities in pathling
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
Recent Improper Input Validation vulnerabilities
- 9.6 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.5 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 8.3 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.