CVE Intelligence
High File handling

CVE-2026-17106 — Tar extraction in moby/go-archive can write outside the destination directory via link following

The tar extraction routines in moby/go-archive (Unpack, UnpackLayer, Untar/UntarUncompressed, and the ApplyLayer helpers) do not confine filesystem operations to the destination directory. The extractor decides where each archive entry lands using lexical string checks and then performs the filesystem operation on a path that is resolved by the OS, so links introduced by the archive can be followed out of the destination directory. An attacker who controls the contents of an archive can create or overwrite files at arbitrary paths writable by the extracting process.

Published Aug 18, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Docker

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.4% (30-day exploitation probability)+6
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.44%
ahead of 37% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Docker
Compose and 5 more
CVSS base
7.1
High · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Docker Compose, Docker Desktop, Docker Docker CLI…).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (file handling), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Docker Compose < 5.4.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Docker Desktop < 4.86.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Docker Docker CLI < 29.7.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Docker Docker Sandboxes < 0.38.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Docker Engine < 29.7.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Moby Go-archive < 0.3.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Attack requirements
Present
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Active
Scope
X
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
High
Integrity (vulnerable system)
High
Availability (vulnerable system)
High
Confidentiality (subsequent)
None
Integrity (subsequent)
None
Availability (subsequent)
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.1 CVSS 4.0 High — — security@docker.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.1 CVSS 4.0 High — — Docker via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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:X (score shown at the top: security@docker.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-59 · Link Following

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Monitor file creation in web directories and paths with traversal sequences (../).
endpoint telemetry (EDR)file integrity (FIM)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · moby/go-archive, docker/docker sandboxes, docker/docker desktop, docker/docker engine, docker/docker cli, docker/docker
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.1
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Awaiting Analysis
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Aug 18, 2026 · Docker

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

8 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Docker
every CVE for this vendor
File handling
same class
CWE-59
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-106581 Docker Desktop for Windows installer failed to verify external packages 6d
  • CVE-2026-105570 Docker Sandboxes OAuth response masking could be bypassed with a case-variant token host 7d
  • CVE-2026-101998 Fail-open response masking in Docker Sandboxes can expose proxy-managed credentials 7d
  • CVE-2026-105452 Docker Sandboxes egress proxy could forward unrecognized client credentials to managed hosts 7d
  • CVE-2026-92543 Docker Engine insecure-registry fallback via malicious DNS responses 8d
  • CVE-2026-92542 Blind VXLAN injection into encrypted overlay networks from cluster peer 8d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-17106 is "Tar extraction in moby/go-archive can write outside the destination directory via link following", rated High. It affects Compose (Docker); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.44% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.