Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-45582

Gnu Tar ≤ 1.35

Public PoC
Published
11 July 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 4.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0043 36th percentile
Risk Priority 34 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-45582 is a medium-severity Path Traversal: '../filedir' (CWE-24) vulnerability in Gnu Tar. Its CVSS base score is 4.1 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 36th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

GNU Tar through 1.35 allows file overwrite via directory traversal in crafted TAR archives, with a certain two-step process. First, the victim must extract an archive that contains a ../ symlink to a critical directory. Second, the victim must extract…

more

an archive that contains a critical file, specified via a relative pathname that begins with the symlink name and ends with that critical file's name. Here, the extraction follows the symlink and overwrites the critical file. This bypasses the protection mechanism of "Member name contains '..'" that would occur for a single TAR archive that attempted to specify the critical file via a ../ approach. For example, the first archive can contain "x -> ../../../../../home/victim/.ssh" and the second archive can contain x/authorized_keys. This can affect server applications that automatically extract any number of user-supplied TAR archives, and were relying on the blocking of traversal. This can also affect software installation processes in which "tar xf" is run more than once (e.g., when installing a package can automatically install two dependencies that are set up as untrusted tarballs instead of official packages). NOTE: the official GNU Tar manual has an otherwise-empty directory for each "tar xf" in its Security Rules of Thumb; however, third-party advice leads users to run "tar xf" more than once into the same directory.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1005 Data from Local System Collection
Adversaries may search local system sources, such as file systems, configuration files, local databases, virtual machine files, or process memory, to find files of interest and sensitive data prior to Exfiltration.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-39804Same product: Gnu Tar
CVE-2025-43919Same vendor: Gnu
CVE-2024-43035Shared CWE-24
CVE-2024-3218Shared CWE-24
CVE-2023-7098Shared CWE-24
CVE-2025-61189Shared CWE-24
CVE-2025-61318Shared CWE-24
CVE-2026-33431Shared CWE-24
CVE-2023-53691Shared CWE-24
CVE-2024-2825Shared CWE-24

Affected Assets

gnu
tar
≤ 1.35

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Input validation directly neutralizes '../' sequences in externally-supplied pathnames before they are resolved.

Enforced access authorizations can limit the damage even when path traversal succeeds.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require input validation and path sanitization that prevent ../ traversal.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

prevents

Secure coding standards require neutralizing ../ sequences and canonicalizing paths before file operations.

finds

Security testing in development catches path-traversal flaws before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path canonicalization that directly block ../ traversal.

prevents

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against path traversal in file-handling functions.

prevents

Secure architecture principles reduce attack surface but do not prescribe the specific coding fix.

mitigates

Information access restriction limits which files can be reached, mitigating impact of traversal.

References