log.c in Squid Analysis Report Generator (sarg) through 2.3.11 allows local privilege escalation.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 28/100)
- 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: 0.25% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: sarg (Debian:12) 2.4.0-1; sarg (openSUSE:Leap 15.1) 2.3.10-lp151.3.3.1; sarg (SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1) 2.3.10-bp151.4.3.1.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to sarg (Debian:12) 2.4.0-1; sarg (openSUSE:Leap 15.1) 2.3.10-lp151.3.3.1; sarg (SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1) 2.3.10-bp151.4.3.1 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
log.c in Squid Analysis Report Generator (sarg) through 2.3.11 allows local privilege escalation. By default, it uses a fixed temporary directory /tmp/sarg. As the root user, sarg creates this directory or reuses an existing one in an insecure manner. An attacker can pre-create the directory, and place symlinks in it (after winning a /tmp/sarg/denied.int_unsort race condition). The outcome will be corrupted or newly created files in privileged file system locations.
- Published
- Jan 21, 2020
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 15th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-59
Report tools
Action score
28
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 28 / 40 · 7.0 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
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
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 helpAffected 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 |
|---|---|---|
| squid analysis report generator project | squid analysis report generator | cpe:2.3:a:squid_analysis_report_generator_project:squid_analysis_report_generator |
| opensuse | backports sle | cpe:2.3:a:opensuse:backports_sle |
| opensuse | leap | cpe:2.3:o:opensuse:leap |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- opensuse backports sle15.0
- opensuse leap15.1
- squid analysis report generator project squid analysis report generatorup to 2.3.11 inclusive
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | sarg | before 2.4.0-1 | 2.4.0-1 |
| openSUSE:Leap 15.1 | sarg | before 2.3.10-lp151.3.3.1 | 2.3.10-lp151.3.3.1 |
| SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1 | sarg | before 2.3.10-bp151.4.3.1 | 2.3.10-bp151.4.3.1 |
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:sarg | 2.4.0-1 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:sarg | 2.3.10-lp151.3.3.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.1 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:sarg | 2.3.10-bp151.4.3.1 · SUSE:Package Hub 15 SP1 | 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.
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 researchersFinders, 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).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-59 · Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
- Obfuscated Files or Information: HTML SmugglingT1027.006
- Obfuscated Files or Information: Embedded PayloadsT1027.009
- Boot or Logon Autostart Execution:Shortcut ModificationT1547.009
- Hide Artifacts: Resource ForkingT1564.009
- Hijack Execution Flow: Executable Installer File Permissions WeaknessT1574.005
- Hijack Execution Flow: Services File Permissions WeaknessT1574.010
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (7 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.