CVE-2018-6184
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedZEIT Next.js 4 before 4.2.3 has Directory Traversal under the /_next request namespace.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceA directory traversal vulnerability in ZEIT Next.js versions before 4.2.3 allows attackers to access files outside the intended static directory via the /_next endpoint using path traversal sequences (e.g., ../). This affects the internal routing namespace that serves static assets.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 4.0.0= 4.0.1= 4.0.2= 4.0.3= 4.0.4= 4.0.5= 4.1.0= 4.1.1= 4.1.2= 4.1.3= 4.1.4= 4.2.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the installed Next.js versionCheck your package.json file for the 'next' dependency version, or run 'npm list next' or 'yarn list next' to see the installed versionAffected if The installed version is 4.0.0, 4.0.1, 4.0.2, 4.0.3, 4.0.4, 4.0.5, 4.1.0, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4, or 4.2.0
-
Confirm the /_next endpoint is activeMake a GET request to your server at any /_next/ path, such as /_next/ (root of the internal routing namespace)Affected if The server responds with any content or error related to the /_next endpoint, indicating the endpoint is active and could be vulnerable
-
Test for directory traversal on /_nextSend a request to /_next/../ (path traversal sequence) and observe whether the response contains files from outside the intended static directory, or check if the server blocks the traversal attemptAffected if The server returns files or directory listings from outside the static directory, or fails to properly sanitize path traversal sequences in /_next requests
You are affected if you are running any Next.js version from 4.0.0 through 4.2.0 and the /_next endpoint is accessible and allows path traversal sequences to escape the static directory.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to Next.js 4.2.3 or later to patch the directory traversal vulnerability in the /_next request namespace.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-6184 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-6184 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data