CVE-2019-14866· NVD / CVE Program· CNA redhat

In all versions of cpio before 2.13 does not properly validate input files when generating TAR archives.

Noroxi assessment

Priority: Monitor (action score 29/100)

The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.68% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 51.7% of all records.
Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
Fixed version: cpio (Debian:10) 2.12+dfsg-9+deb10u1; cpio (Debian:12) 2.13+dfsg-1; cpio (Debian:8) 2.11+dfsg-4.1+deb8u2.
Mentioned 2 times in Turkish national cyber security advisories (siberguvenlik.gov.tr).

Low priority for now. Upgrade to cpio (Debian:10) 2.12+dfsg-9+deb10u1; cpio (Debian:12) 2.13+dfsg-1; cpio (Debian:8) 2.11+dfsg-4.1+deb8u2 or later.

Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it

Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS

In all versions of cpio before 2.13 does not properly validate input files when generating TAR archives. When cpio is used to create TAR archives from paths an attacker can write to, the resulting archive may contain files with permissions the attacker did not have or in paths he did not have access to. Extracting those archives from a high-privilege user without carefully reviewing them may lead to the compromise of the system.

HighCVSS 7.3 · v3.1—No exploit Fix available

Local privilege escalation

Published: Jan 7, 2020
Updated: Jun 16, 2026
EPSS: 0.6% · 51th percentile
CWE: CWE-20

Report tools

JSON

Action score

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS: 29 / 40 · 7.3 / 10
CISA KEV: 0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS: 0 / 30 · 0.6%

CNA vs NVD score

NVD: 7.3
CNA · redhat: 6.7; 0.6 point gap

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.

Get told when this record changes

Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
No public exploit code on record
A fix has been released

If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.

Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens

Is your version affected? Check it

Noroxi analysis

What does it mean in your environment?

The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.

We use this product, ask for help

Affected systems

Is your version affected?

Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.

Vendor	Product	CPE
gnu	cpio	cpe:2.3:a:gnu:cpio
redhat	enterprise linux	cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_linux

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

gnu cpiobefore 2.13
redhat enterprise linux7.0
redhat enterprise linux8.0

Versions reported by the vendor

Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (redhat). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.

Red Hat cpio
- All cpio versions before 2.13affected

Package-level exposure

OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.

Ecosystem	Package	Affected range	Fix
Debian:10	cpio	before 2.12+dfsg-9+deb10u1	2.12+dfsg-9+deb10u1
Debian:12	cpio	before 2.13+dfsg-1	2.13+dfsg-1
Debian:8	cpio	before 2.11+dfsg-4.1+deb8u2	2.11+dfsg-4.1+deb8u2
openSUSE:Leap 15.0	cpio	before 2.12-lp150.2.3.1	2.12-lp150.2.3.1
openSUSE:Leap 15.1	cpio	before 2.12-lp151.3.3.1	2.12-lp151.3.3.1
openSUSE:Tumbleweed	cpio	before 2.13-3.3	2.13-3.3
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:7::client	cpio	before 0:2.11-28.el7	0:2.11-28.el7
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:7::client	cpio-debuginfo	before 0:2.11-28.el7	0:2.11-28.el7
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos	cpio	before 0:2.12-10.el8	0:2.12-10.el8
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos	cpio-debuginfo	before 0:2.12-10.el8	0:2.12-10.el8
Red Hat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos	cpio-debugsource	before 0:2.12-10.el8	0:2.12-10.el8
Red Hat:rhel_eus:8.2::baseos	cpio	before 0:2.12-8.el8_2.1	0:2.12-8.el8_2.1
Red Hat:rhel_eus:8.2::baseos	cpio-debuginfo	before 0:2.12-8.el8_2.1	0:2.12-8.el8_2.1
Red Hat:rhel_eus:8.2::baseos	cpio-debugsource	before 0:2.12-8.el8_2.1	0:2.12-8.el8_2.1
Rocky Linux:8	cpio	before 0:2.12-10.el8	0:2.12-10.el8
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 SP4	cpio	before 2.11-36.6.1	2.11-36.6.1
SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15	cpio	before 2.12-3.3.1	2.12-3.3.1

Same product

gnu: all records

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

CVE-2021-38185GNU cpio through 2.13 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted pattern file, because of a dstring.c ds_fgetstr integer overf
32Monitor
CVE-2010-4226cpio, as used in build 2007.05.10, 2010.07.28, and possibly other versions, allows remote attackers to overwrite arbitrary files via a symli
29Monitor
CVE-2016-2037The cpio_safer_name_suffix function in util.c in cpio 2.11 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds write) via a
28Monitor

Published before and after this one in the same product

← EarlierCVE-2014-9112Dec 2, 2014 · Heap-based buffer overflow in the process_copy_in function in GNU Cpio 2.11 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a large
22Monitor
← EarlierCVE-2015-1197Feb 19, 2015 · cpio 2.11, when using the --no-absolute-filenames option, allows local users to write to arbitrary files via a symlink attack on a file in a
8Monitor
Later →CVE-2023-7216Feb 5, 2024 · Cpio: extraction allows symlinks which enables remote command execution
21Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

Product / package	Fixed version	Source
debian:cpio	2.13+dfsg-1 · Debian:12	Package registry (OSV)
opensuse:cpio	2.12-lp150.2.3.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.0	Package registry (OSV)
red hat:cpio	0:2.11-28.el7 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:7::client	Package registry (OSV)
red hat:cpio-debuginfo	0:2.11-28.el7 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:7::client	Package registry (OSV)
red hat:cpio-debugsource	0:2.12-10.el8 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:8::baseos	Package registry (OSV)
rocky linux:cpio	0:2.12-10.el8 · Rocky Linux:8	Package registry (OSV)
suse:cpio	2.12-3.3.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15	Package registry (OSV)

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Credits

All researchers

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).