CVE-2026-6815
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 · uneditedAn arbitrary file write vulnerability exists in Casdoor's Local File System storage provider. Due to insufficient path sanitization, an authenticated attacker with administrative privileges can perform a Path Traversal attack to create or overwrite arbitrary files anywhere on the host filesystem, bypassing the application's intended storage sandbox.
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 confidenceCasdoor's Local File System storage provider fails to properly sanitize file paths, allowing an authenticated administrator to use path traversal sequences (e.g., ../) to escape the intended storage directory and write files to arbitrary locations on the host filesystem. This bypasses the application's storage sandbox and enables arbitrary file creation or overwrite.
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<= 2.328.0CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Determine your installed Casdoor versionLocate the Casdoor binary or container image and identify its version (typically shown in startup logs, the admin UI about page, or via a version command if available)Affected if The installed version is 2.328.0 or lower
-
Identify the active storage provider configurationExamine Casdoor's storage configuration (typically in the web UI under Storage or in the configuration file) to determine which provider type is in useAffected if The Local File System (local file system, local, or similar) storage provider is enabled and configured as the active storage backend
-
Verify the storage directory pathLocate the configured storage root directory in Casdoor's storage settings and note the absolute pathAffected if A local file system storage provider is configured with a storage directory that the application has write access to
-
Test for path traversal protectionAs an authenticated administrator, attempt to use the file upload feature with a filename containing traversal sequences (such as ../../../) to see if the application accepts or rejects the inputAffected if The application accepts path traversal sequences and stores files outside the intended storage directory, indicating the vulnerability is present
-
Review storage provider logs for blocked traversal attemptsCheck Casdoor's application logs for any entries related to path validation, traversal blocking, or security rejections when file operations occurAffected if No traversal protection is logged and files are written without validation, confirming the vulnerability
You are affected if you are running Casdoor version 2.328.0 or lower AND have the Local File System storage provider enabled, with the ability for an authenticated administrator to write files outside the configured storage directory via path traversal.
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 · scopedImplement strict path validation that normalizes and verifies all file paths remain within the intended storage directory, rejecting any input containing traversal sequences or absolute paths pointing outside the sandbox.
Casdoor version > 2.328.0 (e.g., 2.328.1 or latest stable)
- 1. Identify the current Casdoor version by checking the application or deployment manifests
- 2. Check Casdoor's official release notes or security advisories for version 2.328.1 or later
- 3. If using a containerized deployment, update the image tag to the latest stable release (e.g., casdoor:latest or a specific version > 2.328.0)
- 4. If using a binary installation, download the updated binary from the official Casdoor repository
- 5. Review the release notes for version 2.328.1+ to confirm the path traversal vulnerability is addressed
- 6. Test the upgrade in a staging environment before deploying to production
- 7. Deploy the upgraded version to production
- 8. Verify that the Local File System storage provider now properly sanitizes path inputs
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6815 — 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-2026-6815 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