Skip to content

Romeo is vulnerable to Archive Slip due to missing checks in sanitization

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 14, 2026 in ctfer-io/romeo • Updated Mar 16, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/ctfer-io/romeo/webserver (Go)

Affected versions

< 0.2.2

Patched versions

0.2.2

Description

Summary

The sanitizeArchivePath function in webserver/api/v1/decoder.go (lines 80-88) is vulnerable to a path traversal bypass due to a missing trailing path separator in the strings.HasPrefix check. A crafted tar archive can write files outside the intended destination directory.

Vulnerable Code

File: webserver/api/v1/decoder.go, lines 80-88

func sanitizeArchivePath(d, t string) (v string, err error) {
	v = filepath.Join(d, t)
	if strings.HasPrefix(v, filepath.Clean(d)) {
		return v, nil
	}
	return "", &ErrPathTainted{
		Path: t,
	}
}

The function is called at line 48 inside [*Decompressor].Unzip, which is invoked by Decode (line 80) during execution of the webserver CLI (command download).

Root Cause

strings.HasPrefix(v, filepath.Clean(d)) does not append a trailing / to the directory prefix, causing a directory name prefix collision. If the destination is /home/user/extract-output and a tar entry is named ../extract-outputevil/pwned, the joined path /home/user/extract-outputevil/pwned passes the prefix check — it starts with /home/user/extract-output — even though it is entirely outside the intended directory.

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Deploy Romeo. A measured app writes its coverage data.

  2. Place the PoC zip on the PVC. Any pod with write access to the ReadWriteMany PVC (or the webserver itself) copies a poc-path-traversal.tar into the coverdir mount path. The archive contains legitimate coverage files alongside two crafted entries with path-traversal names.

  3. Run the webserver CLI against the running webserver:

    webserver download \
      --server http://localhost:8080 \
      --directory /home/user/extract-output
    
  4. Observe the bypass. unzip processes the zip stream. For the malicious entries:

    // entry name: ../extract-outputevil/poc-proof.txt
    filepath.Join("/home/user/extract-output", "../extract-outputevil/poc-proof.txt")
      => "/home/user/extract-outputevil/poc-proof.txt"
    
    strings.HasPrefix("/home/user/extract-outputevil/poc-proof.txt",
                      "/home/user/extract-output")
      => true   // BUG: prefix collision; file lands OUTSIDE target dir
    

    Both malicious entries are written outside /home/user/extract-output/. The legitimate coverage files land correctly inside it.

Impact

Successful exploitation gives an attacker arbitrary file write on the machine running the webserver CLI. Real-world primitives include:

  • Overwriting ~/.bashrc / ~/.zshrc / ~/.profile for RCE on next shell login
  • Appending to ~/.ssh/authorized_keys for persistent SSH backdoor
  • Dropping a malicious entry into ~/.kube/config to hijack cluster access
  • Writing crontab entries for persistent scheduled execution

The attack surface is widened by the default ReadWriteMany PVC access mode, which means any pod in the cluster with the PVC mounted can inject the payload — not just the Romeo webserver itself.

References

@pandatix pandatix published to ctfer-io/romeo Mar 14, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 16, 2026
Reviewed Mar 16, 2026
Last updated Mar 16, 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 v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity Low
Availability Low

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:L/SA:L

EPSS score

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-2026-32805

GHSA ID

GHSA-p799-g7vv-f279

Source code

Credits

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