Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2026-23835 is a medium-severity External Control of File Name or Path (CWE-73) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 5.7 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 26th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as LLM Application Platforms; in the Data-Related Vulnerabilities risk domain.
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.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-5006
Vulnerability Data
LobeHub is an open source human-and-AI-agent network. Prior to version 1.143.3, the file upload feature in `Knowledge Base > File Upload` does not validate the integrity of the upload request, allowing users to intercept and modify the request parameters. As…
more
a result, it is possible to create arbitrary files in abnormal or unintended paths. In addition, since `lobechat.com` relies on the size parameter from the request to calculate file usage, an attacker can manipulate this value to misrepresent the actual file size, such as uploading a `1 GB` file while reporting it as `10 MB`, or falsely declaring a `10 MB` file as a `1 GB` file. By manipulating the size value provided in the client upload request, it is possible to bypass the monthly upload quota enforced by the server and continuously upload files beyond the intended storage and traffic limits. This abuse can result in a discrepancy between actual resource consumption and billing calculations, causing direct financial impact to the service operator. Additionally, exhaustion of storage or related resources may lead to degraded service availability, including failed uploads, delayed content delivery, or temporary suspension of upload functionality for legitimate users. A single malicious user can also negatively affect other users or projects sharing the same subscription plan, effectively causing an indirect denial of service (DoS). Furthermore, excessive and unaccounted-for uploads can distort monitoring metrics and overload downstream systems such as backup processes, malware scanning, and media processing pipelines, ultimately undermining overall operational stability and service reliability. Version 1.143.3 contains a patch for the issue.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Data-Related Vulnerabilities
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: ai, lobechat
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly rejects or sanitizes untrusted path strings before they reach filesystem operations.
Enforces authorization checks on the actual resource accessed, blocking unauthorized files even when a malicious path is supplied.
Least-privilege limits the set of files or directories any subject can affect, shrinking the blast radius of a path-control flaw.
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.
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.
Security testing can detect path-traversal issues but does not itself implement preventive controls.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and path-handling controls that directly prevent external file/path manipulation.
Application security requirements explicitly call for controls against untrusted input influencing file operations.
Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe path construction but do not prescribe concrete file-name controls.
Secure coding standards require canonicalization, allow-listing, and bounds checks on file paths, directly eliminating CWE-73.
Information access restriction limits which files can be reached, indirectly reducing impact of path manipulation.