dbcve.org
Link Following (Symlink)Weakness · CWE-59

CVE-2026-54369

HIGH · 7.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
73/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Zero-click 8 weeks old

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
acl before version 2.4.0 contains a symlink traversal vulnerability in the libacl pathname-based functions acl_get_file(), acl_set_file(), acl_extended_file(), and acl_delete_def_file() that allows local attackers to escalate privileges by replacing any pathname component with a symbolic link. Attackers who control any component of a pathname processed by a privileged caller can redirect ACL read or write operations to arbitrary files or directories, enabling unauthorized manipulation of access control lists and local privilege escalation.

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

The libacl library before version 2.4.0 contains a symlink traversal vulnerability in pathname-based functions (acl_get_file, acl_set_file, acl_extended_file, and acl_delete_def_file). Local attackers who control any pathname component can replace that component with a symbolic link, redirecting ACL read/write operations to arbitrary files or directories, enabling privilege escalation and unauthorized ACL manipulation.

MitigationUpgrade acl library to version 2.4.0 or later. As a compensating control, audit and monitor processes that use these ACL functions with untrusted path input, and implement path verification to detect or block symlink components before passing paths to vulnerable functions.

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 installed libacl version
    Run `rpm -q libacl` (RHEL/CentOS) or `dpkg -l libacl` (Debian/Ubuntu) to find the installed version. On other systems, check `/usr/lib/libacl.so*` or use `ldconfig -p | grep libacl` to locate the library and then inspect its version with `file` or check the package metadata.
    Affected if The installed version is earlier than 2.4.0 (the fixed version).
  2. Identify processes using vulnerable ACL functions
    Search application binaries or scripts for calls to acl_get_file(), acl_set_file(), acl_extended_file(), or acl_delete_def_file() using `grep -r 'acl_get_file\|acl_set_file\|acl_extended_file\|acl_delete_def_file' /path/to/applications`. Also check with `nm` or `objdump` on compiled binaries for these symbols.
    Affected if Any privileged application or service code calls these functions and operates on pathnames an attacker could influence.
  3. Verify path component ownership and permissions
    For any application using the vulnerable functions, audit the directories in the pathname arguments. Check ownership and permissions on each path component: `ls -la /path/to/component1 && ls -la /path/to/component1/component2` etc. Look for world-writable or group-writable directories that untrusted users could modify.
    Affected if Any directory component in the pathname used by ACL operations is writable by an untrusted user, allowing them to insert a symlink.
  4. Check for existing symlinks in ACL-relevant paths
    Audit common directories where ACL operations occur (e.g., /home, /var, application data directories) for any symlinks owned by untrusted users: `find / -type l -ls 2>/dev/null` and review whether these could intercept ACL operations. Check mount options with `mount` to see if nosuid or other protections exist.
    Affected if Symlinks exist in paths used for ACL file operations and those symlinks could be pointing to sensitive files or could be replaced by an attacker.

A system is affected if it runs libacl versions earlier than 2.4.0 AND has privileged applications using the vulnerable functions on pathnames with components writable by untrusted users.

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

Upgrade acl library to version 2.4.0 or later. As a compensating control, audit and monitor processes that use these ACL functions with untrusted path input, and implement path verification to detect or block symlink components before passing paths to vulnerable functions.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,120
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-54369 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2026-54369 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