Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2026-49144

MEDIUM · 6.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-02
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
70/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
BrowserStack Runner through 0.9.5 contains a path traversal vulnerability in the _default HTTP handler in lib/server.js that allows unauthenticated network-adjacent attackers to read arbitrary files. Attackers can exploit the unauthenticated HTTP server bound on all interfaces to traverse outside the project root and access sensitive files.

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 confidence

BrowserStack Runner versions up to 0.9.5 have a path traversal vulnerability in the _default HTTP handler in lib/server.js. An unauthenticated attacker can send specially crafted HTTP requests with directory traversal sequences (e.g., ../../) to read files outside the project root directory. The HTTP server binds to all network interfaces, making it accessible to network-adjacent attackers.

MitigationImplement strict path validation in the _default handler to ensure requested paths stay within the project root. Use path normalization and comparison to prevent traversal sequences. Consider binding the server to localhost only if external access is not required, and implement authentication.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Adjacent
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:A/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify BrowserStack Runner version
    Run 'npm list browserstack-runner' or check package.json for the installed version of browserstack-runner
    Affected if Installed version is 0.9.5 or lower (any version through 0.9.5)
  2. Locate the vulnerable server file
    Find lib/server.js in the BrowserStack Runner installation directory (typically node_modules/browserstack-runner/lib/server.js)
    Affected if The file exists and is present in the installation
  3. Check if HTTP server binds to network interfaces
    Examine the server startup configuration or code to determine if the HTTP handler binds to all interfaces (0.0.0.0) rather than localhost only
    Affected if Server binds to 0.0.0.0 or all network interfaces, making it externally accessible
  4. Inspect path validation in _default handler
    Open lib/server.js and locate the _default HTTP handler function. Search for path validation logic that checks for '..' sequences or resolves paths before serving files
    Affected if No path validation code (no '..' check, no path.resolve comparison to root) exists in the _default handler
  5. Verify server is running and reachable
    Confirm the BrowserStack Runner HTTP server is actively running and accepting connections
    Affected if Server is running and accepts HTTP requests

You are affected if BrowserStack Runner version is 0.9.5 or lower, the HTTP server is bound to network interfaces, and the _default handler in lib/server.js lacks path traversal validation for '..' sequences.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict path validation in the _default handler to ensure requested paths stay within the project root. Use path normalization and comparison to prevent traversal sequences. Consider binding the server to localhost only if external access is not required, and implement authentication.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
8.0 hours of engineering $1,420
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,272.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-49144 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-49144 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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