CWE · MITRE source
CWE-61UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following
The product, when opening a file or directory, does not sufficiently account for when the file is a symbolic link that resolves to a target outside of the intended control sphere. This could allow an attacker to cause the product to operate on unauthorized files.
A product that allows UNIX symbolic links (symlink) as part of paths whether in internal code or through user input can allow an attacker to spoof the symbolic link and traverse the file system to unintended locations or access arbitrary files. The symbolic link can permit an attacker to read/write/corrupt a file that they originally did not have permissions to access.
Last updated: 04 July 2026 00:28 UTC
Cumulative inbound coverage
How completely the frameworks we cross-walk collectively cover this — the verdict is the strongest single mapping (overlapping partials are not summed); breadth shows the corroboration behind it.
Collective: mostly · 5 mapping(s) from 5 framework(s): STIG oracle linux 8 1 (mostly) · OWASP-Web 1 (mostly) · CAPEC 1 (partial) · ASVS 5.0 1 (partial) · ATT&CK 1 (partial)
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
This weakness contributes to A01:2025 Broken Access Control.
NIST 800-53 r5 controls that address this weakness (0)AI
| Control | Title | Family | Why it addresses this CWE |
|---|---|---|---|
| No NIST controls proposed yet. | |||
MITRE ATT&CK techniques this weakness enables
Our own two-way CWE↔ATT&CK cross-walk — a direct mapping with no public source (the CWE→CAPEC→ATT&CK chain leaves most top weaknesses, incl. XSS and SQLi, mapped to nothing). Drafted by Grok and spot-checked by Claude Opus 4.8.
Direction: ← other covers this;
→ this covers other (F/M/P = full / mostly /
partial).
Top CVEs of this weakness type, ranked by Risk Priority
| CVE | Risk | CVSS | EPSS | Published |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2026-54420 KEV | 10.0 | 8.5 | 0.0126 | 2026-06-14 |
CVE-2024-28185 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0706 | 2024-04-18 |
CVE-2024-28189 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0721 | 2024-04-18 |
CVE-2024-54661 | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0079 | 2024-12-04 |
CVE-2024-54148 | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0084 | 2024-12-23 |
CVE-2025-23394 UPD | 7.0 | 9.8 | 0.0049 | 2025-05-26 |
CVE-2025-62161 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0024 | 2025-11-06 |
CVE-2025-62596 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0024 | 2025-11-06 |
CVE-2026-34078 UPD | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0168 | 2026-04-07 |
CVE-2026-39860 | 7.0 | 9.0 | 0.0019 | 2026-04-08 |
CVE-2026-39861 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0052 | 2026-04-21 |
CVE-2026-55447 | 7.0 | 9.6 | 0.0041 | 2026-06-23 |
CVE-2017-14798 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0098 | 2018-03-01 |
CVE-2019-16775 | 5.5 | 7.7 | 0.0327 | 2019-12-13 |
CVE-2020-8014 | 5.5 | 7.7 | 0.0050 | 2020-06-29 |
CVE-2020-8019 | 5.5 | 7.7 | 0.0052 | 2020-06-29 |
CVE-2020-15075 | 5.5 | 7.1 | 0.0029 | 2021-03-30 |
CVE-2020-15076 | 5.5 | 7.8 | 0.0036 | 2021-05-26 |
CVE-2021-32547 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32548 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32549 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32550 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32551 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32552 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0029 | 2021-06-12 |
CVE-2021-32553 | 5.5 | 7.3 | 0.0032 | 2021-06-12 |