Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-29064 is a high-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Lfprojects Zarf. Its CVSS base score is 8.2 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 13th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-29064 is a path traversal vulnerability (CWE-22) in Zarf, an air-gapped native package manager for Kubernetes. The issue affects versions from 0.54.0 up to but not including 0.73.1, where archive extraction mishandles symlinks in a specifically crafted Zarf package. This allows symlinks to point outside the destination directory, enabling arbitrary file reads or writes on the host system processing the package. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.2 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N).
Exploitation requires local access to the system and user interaction, as an attacker must convince a user to process a malicious Zarf package with no privileges needed on the attacker's part. Upon extraction, the symlink traversal grants high-impact confidentiality and integrity violations, allowing arbitrary file read or write operations across the system, which could lead to data exfiltration, modification of critical files, or further privilege escalation in air-gapped Kubernetes environments.
The vulnerability has been patched in Zarf version 0.73.1. Administrators should immediately upgrade affected installations to this version or later to mitigate the issue. Additional details are available in the GitHub release notes at https://github.com/zarf-dev/zarf/releases/tag/v0.73.1 and the security advisory at https://github.com/zarf-dev/zarf/security/advisories/GHSA-hcm4-6hpj-vghm.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-10044
Vulnerability Data
Zarf is an Airgap Native Packager Manager for Kubernetes. From version 0.54.0 to before version 0.73.1, a path traversal vulnerability in archive extraction allows a specifically crafted Zarf package to create symlinks pointing outside the destination directory, enabling arbitrary file…
more
read or write on the system processing the package. This issue has been patched in version 0.73.1.
- CWE(s)
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
Enforces the intended directory access authorizations that path traversal would otherwise bypass.
Input validation directly neutralizes special path elements before pathname construction occurs.
Least privilege reduces the impact of any unauthorized file access obtained via traversal.
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.
Patching/maintenance can remediate known path-traversal flaws in deployed software (partial prevention of exploitability) but does nothing to stop the coding defect from being introduced in the first place.
PR.AA-05 defines and reviews access policies but does not address code-level pathname neutralization, so neither direction prevents CWE-22.
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 in development catches path traversal via static/dynamic analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and path sanitization that directly prevent path traversal.
Application security requirements include rules for safe file handling and canonicalization.
Secure architecture principles require least-privilege file access and directory isolation.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe path construction and mandate safe APIs.
Information access restriction limits which files an application may read or write.