dbcve.org
Path TraversalWeakness · CWE-22

CVE-2026-7599

MEDIUM · 6.3 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 →
69/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable 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 detected in Dayoooun hwpx-mcp 0.2.0. This affects the function save_document/export_to_text/export_to_html of the file mcp-server/src/index.ts of the component MCP Interface. Performing a manipulation of the argument output_path results in path traversal. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit is now public and may be used. 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

Path traversal vulnerability in Dayoooun hwpx-mcp v0.2.0 MCP server. The functions save_document, export_to_text, and export_to_html accept user-controlled output_path parameter without validation, allowing attackers to write files to arbitrary filesystem locations via path traversal sequences (e.g., ../../../'). This enables remote file write access leading to potential code execution or system compromise.

MitigationImplement strict input validation on output_path: use path.resolve() to canonicalize paths and verify the resolved path stays within an allowlisted output directory. Reject paths containing traversal sequences or validate against a whitelist of permitted directories.

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/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 checks

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

  1. Identify hwpx-mcp installation and version
    Run 'pip show hwpx-mcp' or check your package manager for the installed version of hwpx-mcp. Compare the version number to v0.2.0.
    Affected if The package hwpx-mcp version 0.2.0 is installed.
  2. Locate MCP server configuration
    Search for configuration files containing 'hwpx-mcp' or 'mcp' server definitions. Look in project directories, ~/.config/, or application runtime folders for JSON or YAML config files defining MCP servers.
    Affected if A configuration file defines an MCP server for hwpx-mcp.
  3. Verify exposed MCP server accessibility
    Check if the MCP server is exposed via HTTP/network. Inspect environment variables (MCP_SERVER_URL, MCP_HOST) or network binding configurations. Confirm the server listens on an accessible interface.
    Affected if The hwpx-mcp MCP server is network-accessible without authentication.
  4. Inspect for output_path parameter usage
    Review code, logs, or API endpoints that invoke save_document, export_to_text, or export_to_html functions. Search for calls passing user-supplied paths to these functions.
    Affected if The functions save_document, export_to_text, or export_to_html accept paths from user input without validation.
  5. Check for path traversal protection
    Examine the source code or runtime behavior of the affected functions. Look for path validation logic using path.resolve(), allowlist checks, or traversal sequence rejection before file operations.
    Affected if No path validation is present before using the output_path parameter in file write operations.

You are affected if hwpx-mcp v0.2.0 is installed and its MCP server exposes the save_document, export_to_text, or export_to_html functions to users without path validation on the output_path parameter.

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 output_path: use path.resolve() to canonicalize paths and verify the resolved path stays within an allowlisted output directory. Reject paths containing traversal sequences or validate against a whitelist of permitted directories.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation1.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
7.0 hours of engineering $1,220
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,952.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7599 — 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-2026-7599 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