CAPEC-126
Path Traversal
An adversary uses path manipulation methods to exploit insufficient input validation of a target to obtain access to data that should be not be retrievable by ordinary well-formed requests. A typical variety of this attack involves specifying a path to a desired file together with dot-dot-slash characters, resulting in the file access API or function traversing out of the intended directory structure and into the root file system. By replacing or modifying the expected path information the access function or API retrieves the file desired by the attacker. These attacks either involve the attacker providing a complete path to a targeted file or using control characters (e.g. path separators (/ or \) and/or dots (.)) to reach desired directories or files.
On this page
Ask an AI about this attack pattern
Show the prompt
Explain the attack pattern CAPEC-126: Path Traversal: how it unfolds, what it needs and how to prevent and detect it in my systems. Use https://capec.mitre.org/data/definitions/126.html and https://cve.bz/cve/capec/126?via=ask-ai-copy, which lists recent CVEs with the weaknesses it exploits. Cite the sources.Opens a third-party assistant; its answer is its own, not cve.bz's. The prompt holds only this attack pattern's id and public links.
How the attack unfolds
Explore
The attacker looks for a way in.
[Fingerprinting of the operating system] In order to perform a valid path traversal, the attacker needs to know what the underlying OS is so that the proper file seperator is used.
3 techniques
- Port mapping. Identify ports that the system is listening on, and attempt to identify inputs and protocol types on those ports.
- TCP/IP Fingerprinting. The attacker uses various software to make connections or partial connections and observe idiosyncratic responses from the operating system. Using those responses, they attempt to guess the actual operating system.
- Induce errors to find informative error messages
[Survey the Application to Identify User-controllable Inputs] The attacker surveys the target application to identify all user-controllable file inputs
Experiment
They probe what they found.
[Vary inputs, looking for malicious results] Depending on whether the application being exploited is a remote or local one, the attacker crafts the appropriate malicious input containing the path of the targeted file or other file system control syntax to be passed to the application
Exploit
They carry out the attack.
[Manipulate files accessible by the application] The attacker may steal information or directly manipulate files (delete, copy, flush, etc.)
Prerequisites
The attacker must be able to control the path that is requested of the target.
The target must fail to adequately sanitize incoming paths
Skills required
- Low skill
Simple command line attacks or to inject the malicious payload in a web page.
- Medium skill
Customizing attacks to bypass non trivial filters in the application.
Resources required
The ability to manually manipulate path information either directly through a client application relative to the service or application or via a proxy application.
Consequences
| Impact | Affects | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Execute Unauthorized Commands | Integrity, Confidentiality, Availability | The attacker may be able to create or overwrite critical files that are used to execute code, such as programs or libraries. |
| Modify Data | Integrity | The attacker may be able to overwrite or create critical files, such as programs, libraries, or important data. If the targeted file is used for a security mechanism, then the attacker may be able to bypass that mechanism. For example, appending a new account at the end of a password file may allow an attacker to bypass authentication. |
| Read Data | Confidentiality | The attacker may be able read the contents of unexpected files and expose sensitive data. If the targeted file is used for a security mechanism, then the attacker may be able to bypass that mechanism. For example, by reading a password file, the attacker could conduct brute force password guessing attacks in order to break into an account on the system. |
| Unreliable Execution | Availability | The attacker may be able to overwrite, delete, or corrupt unexpected critical files such as programs, libraries, or important data. This may prevent the software from working at all and in the case of a protection mechanisms such as authentication, it has the potential to lockout every user of the software. |
Mitigations
Design: Configure the access control correctly.
Design: Enforce principle of least privilege.
Design: Execute programs with constrained privileges, so parent process does not open up further vulnerabilities. Ensure that all directories, temporary directories and files, and memory are executing with limited privileges to protect against remote execution.
Design: Input validation. Assume that user inputs are malicious. Utilize strict type, character, and encoding enforcement.
Design: Proxy communication to host, so that communications are terminated at the proxy, sanitizing the requests before forwarding to server host.
Design: Run server interfaces with a non-root account and/or utilize chroot jails or other configuration techniques to constrain privileges even if attacker gains some limited access to commands.
Implementation: Host integrity monitoring for critical files, directories, and processes. The goal of host integrity monitoring is to be aware when a security issue has occurred so that incident response and other forensic activities can begin.
Implementation: Perform input validation for all remote content, including remote and user-generated content.
Implementation: Perform testing such as pen-testing and vulnerability scanning to identify directories, programs, and interfaces that grant direct access to executables.
Implementation: Use indirect references rather than actual file names.
Implementation: Use possible permissions on file access when developing and deploying web applications.
Implementation: Validate user input by only accepting known good. Ensure all content that is delivered to client is sanitized against an acceptable content specification -- using an allowlist approach.
Weaknesses it exploits
- CWE-22 Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
Recent CVEs with these weaknesses
- 5.5CVE-2026-123181
A path traversal vulnerability in Ivanti Sentry before versions 10.7.4 and 10.8.3 allows a remote authenticated attacker with administrative privileges to create arbitrary directories and files with root privileges.
- –CVE-2026-97881
The embedded OpenEJB HTTP server does not restrict static resource paths to the configured resource directories. A remote unauthenticated attacker can read arbitrary files accessible to the server process. Users are recommended to block ne…
- 8.2CVE-2026-125753
ABP Framework 2.9.0 before 10.6.2 and 10.7.0 pre-releases before 10.7.0 contain a path traversal vulnerability in DefaultBlobFilePathCalculator that allows unauthenticated attackers to access files outside the blob container. Attackers can…
- –CVE-2026-86811
The stateful session bean passivation mechanism derives the on-disk file name from a client-supplied identifier without validating it. A remote attacker with access to the remote EJB service can cause session state to be read from or writt…
- 2.1CVE-2026-124503
A vulnerability was identified in sooperset mcp-atlassian up to 0.24.0. This issue affects the function validate_safe_path of the file src/mcp_atlassian/utils/io.py. The manipulation of the argument path leads to path traversal. The attack…
- 7.5CVE-2026-120013
The agent_memory module accepts a caller-supplied tenant parameter in create_client(tenant=...). Prior to version 0.50.0, the tenant parameter was not validated before being used to construct filesystem paths for secret resolution. A value…
- 8.2CVE-2026-120513
The Everest Forms – Contact Form, Payment Form, Quiz, Survey & Custom Form Builder with AI plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the remove_csv_file_after_email_send function in all…
- 7.5CVE-2026-100386
The Ultra Addons for Contact Form 7 plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Directory Traversal in all versions up to, and including, 3.5.54 via the uacf7_wpcf7_mail_components function. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers t…
The newest records naming one of them. Each weakness's page lists them all.
Related attack patterns
Examples
An example of using path traversal to attack some set of resources on a web server is to use a standard HTTP …
An example of using path traversal to attack some set of resources on a web server is to use a standard HTTP request
http://example/../../../../../etc/passwd
From an attacker point of view, this may be sufficient to gain access to the password file on a poorly protected system. If the attacker can list directories of critical resources then read only access is not sufficient to protect the system.
MITRE's words, unchanged: CAPEC-126 at MITRE. CAPEC is Copyright © 2007–2026, The MITRE Corporation, used under the CAPEC terms of use: “The MITRE Corporation (MITRE) hereby grants you a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC™) for research, development, and commercial purposes. Any copy you make for such purposes is authorized provided that you reproduce MITRE’s copyright designation and this license in any such copy.” CAPEC and the CAPEC logo are trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Credits. All attack patterns.