CVE-2026-46747
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 has been identified in SINEC INS (All versions < V1.0 SP2 Update 6). The affected application does not properly sanitize path input in the `GET /api/sftp/uploadFiles` endpoint used for directory listing. This allows path traversal through crafted input, enabling access to unintended file system locations.
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 path traversal vulnerability exists in SINEC INS in the GET /api/sftp/uploadFiles endpoint used for directory listing. The application fails to properly sanitize path input, allowing attackers to use crafted relative path sequences (such as ../../) to access files and directories outside the intended web root or upload directory.
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<= 1.0= 1.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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.
-
Confirm SINEC INS installation and versionLocate the SINEC INS installation and identify the installed version number. Check the product documentation or installation directory for version information. Compare your installed version against the affected range: version 1.0 and earlier.Affected if The installed version is 1.0 or any version <= 1.0
-
Verify SFTP upload feature is enabledCheck the SINEC INS configuration to determine if the SFTP upload functionality (/api/sftp/uploadFiles endpoint) has been enabled or is active in the environment.Affected if The SFTP upload feature is enabled and accessible
-
Assess network accessibility of the vulnerable endpointDetermine if the /api/sftp/uploadFiles endpoint is exposed on the network. Check firewall rules, reverse proxy configurations, or access control lists that govern access to this API endpoint.Affected if The endpoint is reachable from the network without additional authentication or network restrictions beyond standard application authentication
-
Test for path traversal vulnerability (if authorized)If you have authorization, send a request to /api/sftp/uploadFiles with a path parameter containing directory traversal sequences (such as ../../) to verify whether the application allows escaping the intended directory.Affected if The endpoint accepts directory traversal sequences and returns file listings or content outside the intended SFTP upload directory
You are affected if SINEC INS version 1.0 or earlier is running, the SFTP upload feature is enabled, and the /api/sftp/uploadFiles endpoint is accessible, allowing path traversal sequences to escape the intended 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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to SINEC INS V1.0 SP2 Update 6 or later, which contains the patch for this vulnerability. As an interim measure, implement strict input validation and whitelisting for path parameters to prevent directory traversal sequences.
V1.0 SP2 Update 6 or later
- 1. Identify the current version of SINEC INS installed by accessing the application administration interface or checking system documentation.
- 2. If the current version is earlier than V1.0 SP2 Update 6, obtain the V1.0 SP2 Update 6 or later release package from the official Siemens download portal (cert-portal.siemens.com) or through your Siemens representative.
- 3. Review the upgrade documentation and release notes for SINEC INS V1.0 SP2 Update 6 to understand any prerequisites or migration requirements.
- 4. Perform a backup of the current SINEC INS configuration and any critical data.
- 5. Apply the upgrade to SINEC INS, following the documented upgrade procedure provided by Siemens.
- 6. After upgrade, verify the version number reflects V1.0 SP2 Update 6 or later.
- 7. Test the /api/sftp/uploadFiles endpoint to confirm the path traversal vulnerability is remediated.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-46747 — 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-2026-46747 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