CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-73040NVD status: Deferred

dockge: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-73040 is a high-severity improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in dockge from Louislam, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 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 dockge versions: 1.5.0 and earlier. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.94% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 61% of scored CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of dockge you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Louislamdockge1.5.0 and earlierNot 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
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
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
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:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).

Scoring systemScoreSeverityScored by
CVSS 4.08.7HighCNA (vulncheck.com)
CVSS 3.18.8HighCNA (vulncheck.com)

Official description

Dockge validates a stack name only on the write path. In backend/stack.ts the allow-list check in validate(), which requires the name to match ^[a-z0-9_-]+$, is reached from save() alone, while the path getter returns path.join(this.server.stacksDir, this.name) and Stack.getStack builds path.join(server.stacksDir, stackName) with no check. The socket handlers in backend/agent-socket-handlers/docker-socket-handler.ts confirm the caller is logged in and that the name is a string, then pass it straight to Stack.getStack, so a name containing traversal sequences resolves outside the managed stacks directory. An authenticated user can therefore read the composeENV and composeYAML values of any directory the server process can reach, which discloses the secrets in that directory's .env or Compose file, and can invoke delete(), which runs docker compose down and then fsAsync.rm on the traversed path with recursive and force set, removing that directory. Disclosure is limited to files named .env or an accepted Compose filename, and deletion requires the target directory to hold a valid Compose file so that docker compose down exits successfully. Dockge commonly runs as root with access to the Docker socket, so the reachable set includes unrelated applications on the host. Instances configured with disableAuth, a supported option that logs the caller in as admin automatically, expose both operations without authentication.

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

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.