CVE-2026-7875
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 · uneditedNanoClaw version 1.2.0 and prior contains a host/container filesystem boundary vulnerability in outbound attachment handling and outbox cleanup that allows a compromised or prompt-injected container to read files outside the intended outbox directory by supplying crafted messages_out.id and content.files values or creating symlinked outbox files. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability to trigger host-side reads of arbitrary files and in some cases achieve recursive deletion of paths outside the intended cleanup target.
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 analysisA file path is built from user input without being confined, so sequences like “../” let an attacker step outside the intended directory. That can expose configuration, credentials, or source code, and in the worst case lets an attacker write files where they shouldn't. A durable fix resolves and canonicalises the path, then rejects anything that escapes a known-safe base directory.
General guidance for the path traversal class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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<= 1.2.0CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 · scopedVersion after fix commit 7814e45570edf0024a1a5c2ba9fbc9cb3a49f7f7 (likely 1.2.1 or later)
- Review the vulnerability details: this is a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) in outbound attachment handling and outbox cleanup that allows reading files outside the intended outbox directory
- Examine the vendor patch commit at https://github.com/qwibitai/nanoclaw/commit/7814e45570edf0024a1a5c2ba9fbc9cb3a49f7f7 to understand the code changes
- Upgrade Nanoclaw to the version that includes the fix commit (likely version 1.2.1 or later)
- After upgrading, verify that outbound attachment handling properly validates and restricts file paths to only the intended outbox directory
- Verify that outbox cleanup operations no longer allow recursive deletion of paths outside the intended cleanup target
- Test the fix by attempting to use symlinked files or crafted messages_out.id values to access paths outside the outbox directory
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7875 — 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-2026-7875 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