CVE-2022-3940
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 · uneditedA vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in lanyulei ferry. This affects an unknown part of the file apis/process/task.go. The manipulation of the argument file_name leads to path traversal. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-213447.
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 · moderate confidenceA path traversal vulnerability in lanyulei ferry's apis/process/task.go allows attackers to manipulate the file_name parameter to access or write files outside the intended directory, potentially leading to unauthorized file access or arbitrary file write.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if Ferry Project is deployedSearch for the Ferry application installation directory or check running processes for the ferry service. Look for files or directories containing 'ferry' in the name.Affected if Ferry Project is installed and running in the environment
-
Locate the vulnerable source fileNavigate to the apis/process/ directory and locate task.go. If source code is unavailable, check the compiled binary for endpoints that handle file operations.Affected if The file apis/process/task.go exists and contains file operation logic with a file_name parameter
-
Verify the file_name parameter handling existsInspect the task.go file for functions that process a file_name parameter, particularly in download, upload, or file access endpoints. Search for patterns like 'file_name', 'fileName', or file path operations.Affected if Code handles a file_name parameter without proper path sanitization
-
Test for path traversal vulnerabilityIf testing is authorized, send a request with file_name=../../etc/passwd or similar path traversal sequences to observe if files outside the intended directory are accessible or returned.Affected if The application returns content from files outside the intended directory when given traversal sequences in file_name
-
Check for input validation on file operationsReview the code around the file_name parameter for path validation functions such as realpath, filepath.Clean, or allowlist checks before file operations.Affected if No path validation or allowlisting is implemented for the file_name parameter
If Ferry Project is deployed and the apis/process/task.go file contains file_name parameter handling without proper path traversal validation, the environment is affected by this CVE.
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 dataImplement strict input validation using path canonicalization (realpath) and allowlists for the file_name parameter, ensuring files are accessed only within permitted directories.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-3940 — 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-2022-3940 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