CVE-2026-107935: Gvisor-tap-vsock: gvisor-tap-vsock: unathenticated arbitrary file deletion on the host via /expose
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 37/100)
- 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: 0.23% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: github.com/containers/gvisor-tap-vsock gvisor-tap-vsock 0.9.0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to github.com/containers/gvisor-tap-vsock gvisor-tap-vsock 0.9.0 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
A path traversal vulnerability was found in gvproxy, the network forwarder provided by the gvisor-tap-vsock package. The unauthenticated /services/forwarder/expose endpoint does not validate the caller-supplied socket path, allowing an attacker to delete arbitrary files on the host system.
- Published
- Oct 9, 2026
- Updated
- Nov 12, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 15th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-22
Report tools
Action score
37
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 37 / 40 · 9.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · redhat
- 9.3
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
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.
Is your version affected? Check itNoroxi 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.
—
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.
github.com/containers/gvisor-tap-vsock gvisor-tap-vsock
- 0.4.0 and later · before 0.9.0affected · semver
Red Hat Red Hat Build of Podman Desktop
- all versionsaffected
Red Hat Red Hat Certification Program for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat Edge Manager 1
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat Hardened Images
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4
- all versionsunknown
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 5
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat OpenShift Dev Spaces
- all versionsunknown
Red Hat Red Hat OpenStack Platform 18.0
- all versionsunknown
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alpine:v3.24 | podman | before 5.8.9-r0 | 5.8.9-r0 |
| Debian:13 | golang-github-containers-gvisor-tap-vsocks | from 0 | — |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | podman | before 6.1.4-1.1 | 6.1.4-1.1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|
| github.com/containers/gvisor-tap-vsock gvisor-tap-vsock | 0.9.0 | Vendor (CNA) |
| alpine:podman | 5.8.9-r0 · Alpine:v3.24 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:podman | 6.1.4-1.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | 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.
- Published
- Fix recorded+3 d
- TodayNov 12, 2026+34 d
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.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
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 on the same network segment can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
nvd-secondary
Root cause
A user-supplied file name is joined with the allowed directory, but the result is never checked to confirm it is still inside that directory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-22 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
const file = path.join(ROOT, req.query.name);
res.sendFile(file);Fixed
const file = path.resolve(ROOT, req.query.name);
if (!file.startsWith(ROOT + path.sep)) {
return res.sendStatus(400);
}
res.sendFile(file);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)
- Path TraversalCAPEC-126likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation LogicCAPEC-64likelihood: High · High
- Manipulating Web Input to File System CallsCAPEC-76likelihood: High · Very High
- Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-78likelihood: High · High
- Using Slashes in Alternate EncodingCAPEC-79likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
- SSVC exploitation— → none
- Exploit maturity— → none
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.