dbcve.org
Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2026-7588

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-01
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable 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
A vulnerability was found in ggerve coding-standards-mcp. This issue affects the function get_style_guide/get_best_practices of the file server.py. The manipulation of the argument Language results in path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

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 confidence

A path traversal vulnerability exists in the get_style_guide/get_best_practices function in server.py of ggerve coding-standards-mcp. The function accepts a Language argument that is not properly validated, allowing attackers to manipulate the path and access files outside the intended directory through path traversal sequences.

MitigationImplement strict input validation on the Language parameter to whitelist allowed values and sanitize path traversal sequences; use os.path.normpath() and ensure the final resolved path remains within the intended directory.

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
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 checks

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

  1. Confirm ggerve coding-standards-mcp is installed
    Locate the package by running 'pip show ggerve-coding-standards-mcp' or checking your Python environment's site-packages for the ggerve_coding_standards_mcp directory
    Affected if The package is present in your environment
  2. Identify the installed version
    Run 'pip show ggerve-coding-standards-mcp' and note the Version field, then compare against any published affected version ranges
    Affected if Your version falls within the affected range or no version is specified but the package exists
  3. Locate server.py and verify vulnerable function exists
    Find server.py within the package installation directory (typically under site-packages/ggerve_coding_standards_mcp/) and search for the 'get_style_guide' or 'get_best_practices' function definitions
    Affected if The function exists in your installed version
  4. Inspect the Language parameter handling
    Examine the function code to see how the Language argument is processed; look for direct use of this parameter in path construction without validation
    Affected if The Language parameter is used in path operations without sanitization (no whitelist, no os.path.normpath checks, no directory containment validation)
  5. Verify the function is exposed via MCP protocol
    Check if the server.py exposes get_style_guide or get_best_practices as an MCP tool or API endpoint that accepts external input
    Affected if The function is accessible as a callable MCP tool or API that accepts user-supplied Language values

You are affected if ggerve coding-standards-mcp is installed, the vulnerable get_style_guide/get_best_practices function exists in your server.py, and the Language parameter flows directly into path operations without validation or containment checks.

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 input validation on the Language parameter to whitelist allowed values and sanitize path traversal sequences; use os.path.normpath() and ensure the final resolved path remains within the intended directory.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7588 — 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-2026-7588 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