Medium exploit reference

CVE-2026-53655 — node-tar applies PAX size override to intermediary GNU long-name/long-link headers, causing tar parser interpretation differential (file smuggling)

node-tar is a full-featured Tar for Node.js. Prior to 7.5.16, tar (node-tar) applies a PAX extended header's size= record (and other PAX overrides) to the next header entry of any type, including intermediary metadata headers such as a GNU long-name (L) or long-link (K) entry. Per POSIX pax, a PAX extended header (x) describes the next file entry, not the intermediary extension headers that may sit between the x header and the file it annotates. Because node-tar lets the PAX size override the byte length of an intervening L/K/x header, an attacker can desynchronize node-tar's stream cursor relative to every other mainstream tar implementation (GNU tar, libarchive/bsdtar, Python tarfile, and the now-fixed tar-rs / astral-tokio-tar). The result is a tar parser interpretation differential (CWE-436): a single crafted archive yields a different set of members under node-tar than under the reference tar tools. An attacker can use this to hide a member from one parser while it is visible to another, which defeats security tooling whose scanner and extractor disagree on archive contents (e.g. a malware/secret scanner that lists entries with one library while a downstream step extracts with another) This vulnerability is fixed in 7.5.16.

Published Jun 22, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Low

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 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
Technical severity (medium)+3
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

0.16%

ahead of 4% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Isaacs

Node-tar and 1 more

CVSS base

5.5

Medium · 3 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

can an attacker script the kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

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

Documented mitigation — github.com (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

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.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Isaacs Node-tar, Isaacs Tar).
Apply the documented mitigations until a definitive fix is available.
Exploitation requires user interaction: tighten email/web filtering and warn affected users.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Isaacs	Node-tar	version < 7.5.16	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Isaacs	Tar	< 7.5.16	Vulnerable	NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

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

Attack vector

Local

Attack complexity

Low

Privileges required

None

User interaction

Required

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

High

Availability

None

Every base score collected

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

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Scored by
6.9	CVSS 4.0	Medium	—	—	security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.9	CVSS 4.0	Medium	—	—	GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
5.5	CVSS 3.1	Medium	1.8	3.6	nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-436

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.16%

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.

endpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Affected products added · isaacs/node-tar
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
SSVC assessment updated
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
Fix documented
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVSS changed · 5.5
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Source status changed · → Analyzed
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
CVE published
Jun 22, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

1 on the record

github.com/isaacs/node-tar/security/advisories/GHSA-vmf3-w455-68vh
Exploit, Mitigation, Vendor Advisory, x_refsource_CONFIRM, NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Isaacs
every CVE for this vendor

CWE-436
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

High CVE-2026-73566 node-tar: Uncontrolled recursion in mapHas/filesFilter allows uncatchable stack-overflow DoS via crafted long-path tar with member selection Aug 13, 2026
Medium CVE-2026-59875 node-tar: Uncaught Exception DoS via NUL byte in PAX path/linkpath records Jul 8, 2026
High CVE-2026-59871 node-tar: Process crash via PAX numeric path type confusion Jul 8, 2026
High CVE-2026-59873 node-tar: Decompression/parse DoS via unlimited input Jul 8, 2026
High CVE-2026-59874 node-tar: Negative tar entry size causes infinite loop in archive replace Jul 8, 2026
Medium CVE-2026-31802 node-tar Symlink Path Traversal via Drive-Relative Linkpath Mar 10, 2026

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 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-2026-53655 is "node-tar applies PAX size override to intermediary GNU long-name/long-link headers, causing tar parser interpretation differential (file smuggling)", rated Medium. It affects Node-tar (Isaacs); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.16% 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.