compliance-trestle: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
CVE-2026-57171 is a high-severity improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in compliance-trestle from Oscal-compass, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.7 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. Affected compliance-trestle versions: < 3.12.4; >= 4.0.0, < 4.1.0. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.22% 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 compliance-trestle 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
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oscal-compass | compliance-trestle | < 3.12.4; >= 4.0.0, < 4.1.0 | Not stated |
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
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- 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
- NoneNo data is disclosed.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (github.com).
Official description
Compliance-trestle (Trestle) is a Python SDK and command-line tool for managing OSCAL compliance documents. In versions before 3.12.4 and versions 4.0.0 through 4.0.3, the catalog-generate, profile-generate, and ssp-generate author commands write generated Markdown to an attacker-influenced output path without path-traversal validation, allowing arbitrary file write outside the Trestle workspace. These commands join the user-supplied output argument onto the Trestle root and write to the result, but guard it only with an is_directory_name_allowed() task-name-collision check rather than the PathSecurityValidator.validate_local_path() guard used by the jinja command, so an absolute path or one containing traversal sequences escapes the workspace and writes files under an attacker-chosen location as the invoking process owner. The security boundary is crossed when a trusted CI job, shared service, or wrapper derives the output argument from repository-controlled, tenant-controlled, or otherwise untrusted data while expecting output to stay inside the workspace. When --force-overwrite is used, the selected output directory is first recursively deleted, extending the primitive to destruction of an attacker-chosen directory tree and enabling indirect code execution by overwriting files a pipeline later runs. This issue is fixed in versions 3.12.4 and 4.1.0.
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: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Advisories
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in compliance-trestle
- 7.8 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 8.4 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
Recent Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities
- 7.7 High severity
- 7.4 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.7 High severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 8.5 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.