CVE-2026-46703
BoxLite: Path Traversal Vulnerability in boxlite Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. Prior to version 0.9.0, Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
Attack profile
How easy it is to exploit
- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- None
- User interaction
- Required
What an attacker can affect
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Exploit likelihood
What each source reports
CVE List Score used
9.6
BoxLite: Path Traversal Vulnerability in boxlite Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. Prior to version 0.9.0, Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
- Record
CVE-2026-46703- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Weakness
- CWE-22
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-36165
9.6
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. Prior to version 0.9.0, Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
- Record
EUVD-2026-36165- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Updated
- 2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j
9.6
Boxlite: Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Summary
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and run OCI containers within them. Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host.
Details
- Entry Point — OCI Layer Tarball Extraction
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: extract_layer_tarball_streaming() (line 24) Code:
pub fn extract_layer_tarball_streaming(tarball_path: &Path, dest: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<u64> {
// ...
apply_oci_layer(reader, dest)
}
Issue: The function passes the tar reader into apply_oci_layer. The tarball comes from a registry blob that has passed SHA256 integrity verification against the manifest digest — but the manifest itself is controlled by the registry, so a malicious registry can serve a valid manifest pointing to a crafted layer blob with a matching digest.
- Main Extraction Loop — Symlink Created Without Target Validation
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: apply_oci_layer() (line 196) Code:
EntryType::Symlink => {
let target = link_name.ok_or_else(|| { /* ... */ })?;
create_symlink(&full_path, &target)?; // line 327 — target is NOT validated
}
Issue: The symlink's full_path (the link itself) is sanitized by normalize_entry_path to stay within dest. However, the target (what the symlink points to) is never validated. An entry with path usr and link target /etc creates {dest}/usr -> /etc, a symlink pointing outside the extraction root. There is no check that target stays within dest, is relative, or doesn't escape the container root.
- Symlink Target Written Verbatim
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_symlink() (line 747) Code:
fn create_symlink(path: &Path, target: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<()> {
std::os::unix::fs::symlink(target, path).map_err(|e| { /* ... */ })
}
Issue: std::os::unix::fs::symlink is an lstat-level operation — it creates the symlink with the provided target string verbatim, no matter what it contains. If target is /etc, the link records /etc as the target. No containment check.
- ensure_parent_dirs Deliberately Follows and Preserves Escape Symlinks
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: ensure_parent_dirs() (line 457) Code:
Ok(m) if m.file_type().is_symlink() => {
// Check if symlink points to a directory
match fs::metadata(current_check) { // follows symlink
Ok(target_m) if target_m.is_dir() => {
trace!("Preserving symlink that points to directory: ...");
break; // line 516 — stop, keep the symlink, treat as valid parent
}
Issue: When the next tar entry has path usr/passwd and the code calls ensure_parent_dirs("{dest}/usr/passwd", dest), it walks up to {dest}/usr, finds it is a symlink pointing to a directory (e.g., /etc), and explicitly breaks the loop to preserve it — treating the out-of-root symlink as a valid, navigable parent. The create_dir_all call is then skipped for this path. The caller proceeds to open and write {dest}/usr/passwd, which the kernel resolves through the symlink to /etc/passwd.
- File Written Through Escaped Symlink
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_regular_file() (line 715) Code:
fn create_regular_file<R: Read>(entry: &mut Entry<R>, path: &Path, mode: u32) ->…
- Record
GHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Weakness
- CWE-22
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
NVD
9.6
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. Prior to version 0.9.0, Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
- Record
CVE-2026-46703- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Weakness
- CWE-22
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSV
9.6
BoxLite: Path Traversal Vulnerability in boxlite Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and launch OCI containers within them to run untrusted code. Prior to version 0.9.0, Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host. This issue has been patched in version 0.9.0.
- Record
CVE-2026-46703- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Weakness
- CWE-22
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j
9.6
Boxlite: Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Summary
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and run OCI containers within them. Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host.
Details
- Entry Point — OCI Layer Tarball Extraction
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: extract_layer_tarball_streaming() (line 24) Code:
pub fn extract_layer_tarball_streaming(tarball_path: &Path, dest: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<u64> {
// ...
apply_oci_layer(reader, dest)
}
Issue: The function passes the tar reader into apply_oci_layer. The tarball comes from a registry blob that has passed SHA256 integrity verification against the manifest digest — but the manifest itself is controlled by the registry, so a malicious registry can serve a valid manifest pointing to a crafted layer blob with a matching digest.
- Main Extraction Loop — Symlink Created Without Target Validation
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: apply_oci_layer() (line 196) Code:
EntryType::Symlink => {
let target = link_name.ok_or_else(|| { /* ... */ })?;
create_symlink(&full_path, &target)?; // line 327 — target is NOT validated
}
Issue: The symlink's full_path (the link itself) is sanitized by normalize_entry_path to stay within dest. However, the target (what the symlink points to) is never validated. An entry with path usr and link target /etc creates {dest}/usr -> /etc, a symlink pointing outside the extraction root. There is no check that target stays within dest, is relative, or doesn't escape the container root.
- Symlink Target Written Verbatim
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_symlink() (line 747) Code:
fn create_symlink(path: &Path, target: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<()> {
std::os::unix::fs::symlink(target, path).map_err(|e| { /* ... */ })
}
Issue: std::os::unix::fs::symlink is an lstat-level operation — it creates the symlink with the provided target string verbatim, no matter what it contains. If target is /etc, the link records /etc as the target. No containment check.
- ensure_parent_dirs Deliberately Follows and Preserves Escape Symlinks
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: ensure_parent_dirs() (line 457) Code:
Ok(m) if m.file_type().is_symlink() => {
// Check if symlink points to a directory
match fs::metadata(current_check) { // follows symlink
Ok(target_m) if target_m.is_dir() => {
trace!("Preserving symlink that points to directory: ...");
break; // line 516 — stop, keep the symlink, treat as valid parent
}
Issue: When the next tar entry has path usr/passwd and the code calls ensure_parent_dirs("{dest}/usr/passwd", dest), it walks up to {dest}/usr, finds it is a symlink pointing to a directory (e.g., /etc), and explicitly breaks the loop to preserve it — treating the out-of-root symlink as a valid, navigable parent. The create_dir_all call is then skipped for this path. The caller proceeds to open and write {dest}/usr/passwd, which the kernel resolves through the symlink to /etc/passwd.
- File Written Through Escaped Symlink
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_regular_file() (line 715) Code:
fn create_regular_file<R: Read>(entry: &mut Entry<R>, path: &Path, mode: u32) ->…
- Record
GHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Weakness
- CWE-22
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
Show 4 moreShow less
OSVPYSEC-2026-298
9.6
Boxlite: Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host
Summary
Boxlite is a sandbox service that allows users to create lightweight virtual machines (Boxes) and run OCI containers within them. Boxlite allows users to specify the OCI image used by containers in the sandbox. However, when processing tar entries in OCI images, Boxlite does not account for the possibility that entries may be symlinks pointing to absolute paths. An attacker can craft a malicious OCI image and distribute it on image hosting platforms such as DockerHub, tricking users into using it. Once a user loads the malicious image, the attacker can write arbitrary content to any path on the host, which can further lead to remote code execution on the host.
Details
- Entry Point — OCI Layer Tarball Extraction
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: extract_layer_tarball_streaming() (line 24) Code:
pub fn extract_layer_tarball_streaming(tarball_path: &Path, dest: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<u64> {
// ...
apply_oci_layer(reader, dest)
}
Issue: The function passes the tar reader into apply_oci_layer. The tarball comes from a registry blob that has passed SHA256 integrity verification against the manifest digest — but the manifest itself is controlled by the registry, so a malicious registry can serve a valid manifest pointing to a crafted layer blob with a matching digest.
- Main Extraction Loop — Symlink Created Without Target Validation
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: apply_oci_layer() (line 196) Code:
EntryType::Symlink => {
let target = link_name.ok_or_else(|| { /* ... */ })?;
create_symlink(&full_path, &target)?; // line 327 — target is NOT validated
}
Issue: The symlink's full_path (the link itself) is sanitized by normalize_entry_path to stay within dest. However, the target (what the symlink points to) is never validated. An entry with path usr and link target /etc creates {dest}/usr -> /etc, a symlink pointing outside the extraction root. There is no check that target stays within dest, is relative, or doesn't escape the container root.
- Symlink Target Written Verbatim
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_symlink() (line 747) Code:
fn create_symlink(path: &Path, target: &Path) -> BoxliteResult<()> {
std::os::unix::fs::symlink(target, path).map_err(|e| { /* ... */ })
}
Issue: std::os::unix::fs::symlink is an lstat-level operation — it creates the symlink with the provided target string verbatim, no matter what it contains. If target is /etc, the link records /etc as the target. No containment check.
- ensure_parent_dirs Deliberately Follows and Preserves Escape Symlinks
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: ensure_parent_dirs() (line 457) Code:
Ok(m) if m.file_type().is_symlink() => {
// Check if symlink points to a directory
match fs::metadata(current_check) { // follows symlink
Ok(target_m) if target_m.is_dir() => {
trace!("Preserving symlink that points to directory: ...");
break; // line 516 — stop, keep the symlink, treat as valid parent
}
Issue: When the next tar entry has path usr/passwd and the code calls ensure_parent_dirs("{dest}/usr/passwd", dest), it walks up to {dest}/usr, finds it is a symlink pointing to a directory (e.g., /etc), and explicitly breaks the loop to preserve it — treating the out-of-root symlink as a valid, navigable parent. The create_dir_all call is then skipped for this path. The caller proceeds to open and write {dest}/usr/passwd, which the kernel resolves through the symlink to /etc/passwd.
- File Written Through Escaped Symlink
File: boxlite/src/images/archive/tar.rs Function: create_regular_file() (line 715) Code:
fn create_regular_file<R: Read>(entry: &mut Entry<R>, path: &Path, mode: u32) ->…
- Record
PYSEC-2026-298- CVSS 3.1
- 9.6 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVRUSTSEC-2026-0148
10.0
OCI layer symlink escape → arbitrary host write
Affected versions of boxlite extract OCI image layer tarballs without
fully containing path resolution to the extraction root. A crafted layer
containing a symlink whose target is an absolute on-host path (e.g.
escape -> /tmp) followed by a file entry that resolves through that
symlink (e.g. escape/<path>/pwned.txt) caused the extractor to write
the payload to the host filesystem outside the intended rootfs directory.
The fix in v0.9.0 routes every destructive filesystem operation through a
SafeRoot handle (openat2(RESOLVE_IN_ROOT) on Linux, lexical fallback
elsewhere) so that no tar entry can resolve outside the extraction root,
even with adversarial symlinks placed by earlier entries in the same
layer.
This is a container-escape during image extraction, exploitable by any
user who pulls or loads a malicious OCI image — including via
SimpleBox(rootfs_path=...) from an untrusted local layout.
- Record
RUSTSEC-2026-0148- CVSS 3.1
- 10.0 Critical
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H - Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVGO-2026-5344 No score
Boxlite: Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host in github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/sdks/go
Boxlite: Path Traversal Vulnerability Leads to Arbitrary File Write on the Host in github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/sdks/go
- Record
GO-2026-5344- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVopenSUSE-SU-2026:21483-1 No score
Security update for govulncheck-vulndb
This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:
- Update to version 0.0.20260723T184607 2026-07-23T18:46:07Z (jsc#PED-11136).
Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:
- GO-2026-4730 CVE-2026-33022 GHSA-cv4x-93xx-wgfj
- GO-2026-4761 CVE-2026-33211 GHSA-j5q5-j9gm-2w5c
- GO-2026-5102 CVE-2026-45021 GHSA-3vcp-chfh-f6r2
- GO-2026-5272 CVE-2026-40938 GHSA-94jr-7pqp-xhcq
- GO-2026-5486 CVE-2026-40924 GHSA-m2cx-gpqf-qf74
- GO-2026-5542 CVE-2026-40090 GHSA-pj97-4p9w-gx3q
- GO-2026-5630 CVE-2026-25542 GHSA-rmx9-2pp3-xhcr
- GO-2026-5643 CVE-2026-40923 GHSA-rx35-6rhx-7858
- GO-2026-5675 CVE-2026-41492 GHSA-vvf7-6rmr-m29q
- GO-2026-5711 CVE-2026-40161 GHSA-wjxp-xrpv-xpff
- GO-2026-5746 CVE-2026-41567 GHSA-x86f-5xw2-fm2r
- GO-2026-5749 CVE-2026-41328 GHSA-x92x-px7w-4gx4
- GO-2026-5837 CVE-2026-44840 GHSA-q2m9-6jp9-c6mc
- GO-2026-5929 CVE-2026-44342 GHSA-26v7-h57m-gh9m
- GO-2026-5930 CVE-2026-33655 GHSA-6qcr-qxgr-m7fv
- GO-2026-5933 GHSA-3g4q-2f67-2gvh
- GO-2026-5934 GHSA-59qp-cfj3-rp64
- GO-2026-5935 GHSA-7856-g3gv-9wq8
- GO-2026-5936 CVE-2026-53552 GHSA-26rh-24rg-j3vv
- GO-2026-5937 CVE-2026-53508 GHSA-2jcc-mxv7-p3f9
- GO-2026-5938 CVE-2026-53553 GHSA-4g5x-hcwm-82jw
- GO-2026-5939 CVE-2026-10517 GHSA-698x-9w2p-7vvp
- GO-2026-5940 CVE-2026-53572 GHSA-6w3m-4hhp-775q
- GO-2026-5941 CVE-2026-53487 GHSA-gvhc-wv3v-7pf8
- GO-2026-5942 CVE-2026-46600
- GO-2026-5944 CVE-2026-50197 GHSA-659f-rgp5-w4wf
- GO-2026-5945 CVE-2026-6815 GHSA-rmxx-v9rj-vpvg
- GO-2026-5946 CVE-2026-52831 GHSA-v5px-423j-pf7p
- GO-2026-5947 CVE-2026-53649 GHSA-xqhv-chqm-fhcc
- GO-2026-5948 CVE-2026-50554 GHSA-588f-fvcv-xhvf
- GO-2026-5949 CVE-2026-50553 GHSA-rqrh-8wpv-x7hh
- GO-2026-5950 CVE-2026-53602 GHSA-339v-266x-79xr
- GO-2026-5951 CVE-2026-10219 GHSA-6jm8-4fhr-5w64
- GO-2026-5952 CVE-2026-49834 GHSA-9vcr-p3rj-q5q6
- GO-2026-5953 CVE-2026-9094 GHSA-c9w5-qp6m-m395
- GO-2026-5956 CVE-2026-55252 GHSA-h5g6-xmh4-hc37
- GO-2026-5957 CVE-2026-54158 GHSA-5xfx-xj4h-5p7r
- GO-2026-5958 CVE-2026-54068 GHSA-gcm7-57gf-953c
- GO-2026-5959 CVE-2026-54072 GHSA-h29v-hj44-q8cv
- GO-2026-5961 CVE-2026-54069 GHSA-hvr9-72v2-fff3
- GO-2026-5962 CVE-2026-54088 GHSA-m93h-4hw7-5qcm
- GO-2026-5963 CVE-2026-54067 GHSA-mvjr-vv3c-w4qv
- GO-2026-5964 CVE-2026-54066 GHSA-p4m3-mgmm-c664
- GO-2026-5965 CVE-2026-54070 GHSA-w7cg-whh7-xp28
- GO-2026-5966 CVE-2026-54089 GHSA-xqp3-jq6g-x3qm
- GO-2026-5967 CVE-2026-50551 GHSA-56mp-4f3v-fgj2
- GO-2026-5968 CVE-2026-54174 GHSA-fpg8-7664-jc5q
- GO-2026-5969 GHSA-g936-7jqj-mwv8
- GO-2026-5970 CVE-2026-56852
- GO-2026-5973 CVE-2026-54250 GHSA-jxr7-mqhw-9p98
- GO-2026-5974 CVE-2026-44300 GHSA-wmj8-9953-vff5
- GO-2026-5975 CVE-2026-50018 GHSA-42j2-w334-qxw7
- GO-2026-5976 CVE-2026-50141 GHSA-g7mm-9vx7-jm7h
- GO-2026-5977 CVE-2026-50013 GHSA-qrh4-p6v4-mrfg
- GO-2026-5978 CVE-2026-50125 GHSA-qw5r-ppcg-f8rj
- GO-2026-5979 CVE-2026-50006 GHSA-xrcf-6jh3-ggvx
- GO-2026-5980 CVE-2026-50158 GHSA-2c7f-fxww-6w6c
- GO-2026-5981 GHSA-mqxv-9rm6-w8qc
- GO-2026-5982 GHSA-pqg7-v6wh-3pfp
- GO-2026-5984 CVE-2026-53604 GHSA-2p2f-px33-4vv5
- GO-2026-5985 GHSA-7rx3-5wx3-5v76
- GO-2026-5986 CVE-2026-61699 GHSA-cm26-5974-52h8
- GO-2026-5987 CVE-2026-55513 GHSA-g4x6-jcvr-9m3g
- GO-2026-5988 CVE-2026-54628 GHSA-hwrq-8wxh-q4xv
- GO-2026-5989 CVE-2026-55512 GHSA-m3cx-mwpg-32jg
- GO-2026-5990 CVE-2026-54629 GHSA-mf78-3rpf-r784
- GO-2026-5991 CVE-2026-53603 GHSA-q4vm-pq3q-8wgq
- GO-2026-5992 CVE-2026-61549 GHSA-qf34-295c-26v8
- GO-2026-5996 CVE-2026-54450 GHSA-pph6-vfjv-vpjw
- GO-2026-5997 CVE-2026-54452 GHSA-xgch-x3mx-cm3c
- GO-2026-5998 CVE-2026-54495 GHSA-398h-7f66-3h4p
- GO-2026-5999 CVE-2026-10814 GHSA-jh6h-v6mp-h22v
- GO-2026-6002 CVE-2026-58196 GHSA-pr64-jmmf-jp54
- GO-2026-6003 CVE-2026-53714 GHSA-22xc-xg2r-9j7v
- GO-2026-6004 CVE-2026-52833 GHSA-3v79-m2cg-89ww
- GO-2026-6005 CVE-2026-53715 GHSA-8fv2-88gg-hm7q
- GO-2026-6006 CVE-2026-53716 GHSA-cxpq-8v7q-cg56 *…
- Record
openSUSE-SU-2026:21483-1- Updated
- 2026-11-02
Affected products
Affected packages
| Package | Affected | Fixed |
|---|---|---|
boxlitePyPI |
before 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
boxlite-clicrates.io |
before 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
boxlitecrates.io |
before 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
@boxlite-ai/boxlitenpm |
before 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/sdks/goGo |
before 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
boxlitePyPI |
before 0.9.0, plus listed versions 0.5.100.5.110.5.120.5.130.5.14 Show 6 moreShow less0.5.90.6.00.7.00.7.40.7.50.8.2 |
0.9.0 |
boxlitePyPI |
before 0.9.0, plus listed versions 0.5.100.5.110.5.120.5.130.5.14 Show 13 moreShow less0.5.20.5.30.5.40.5.50.5.60.5.70.5.80.5.90.6.00.7.00.7.40.7.50.8.2 |
0.9.0 |
boxlitecrates.io |
0.0.0-0 up to 0.9.0 | 0.9.0 |
govulncheck-vulndbopenSUSE:Leap 16.0 From an advisory covering 1734 CVEs |
before 0.0.20260723T184607-160000.1.1 | 0.0.20260723T184607-160000.1.1 |
History
| Recorded | Changed | Sources |
|---|---|---|
| affected, facts | ||
| first indexed | CVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV |
Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.
In short
CVE-2026-46703 is a critical vulnerability (CVSS 9.6) in Boxlite-ai Boxlite, published May 16, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.48%, the 41st percentile. Fixed in boxlite 0.9.0.
References
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/security/advisories/GHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/releases/tag/v0.9.0
rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2026-0148.html
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-46703
github.com/advisories/GHSA-f396-4rp4-7v2j
github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/46xxx/CVE-2026-46703.json
Show 194 moreShow less
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite
pypi.org/project/boxlite
crates.io/crates/boxlite
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/pull/429
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/pull/446
github.com/boxlite-ai/boxlite/pull/461
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11063
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11066
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11067
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11068
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11069
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11070
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11071
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11072
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11073
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11074
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11075
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11076
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11077
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11078
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11079
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11080
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11081
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11082
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11083
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2016-11084
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18870
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18871
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18872
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18873
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18874
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18875
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18876
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18877
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18878
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18879
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18883
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18884
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18885
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18886
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18887
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18888
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18889
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18890
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18891
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18892
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18893
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18894
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18895
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18896
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18897
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18898
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18900
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18901
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18902
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18903
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18904
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18905
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18906
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18907
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18908
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18909
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18911
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18912
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18915
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18916
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18917
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2017-18918
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2018-21258
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2019-8400
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2021-25320
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2022-45786
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-26154
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-32199
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-34620
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43630
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43631
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43632
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43633
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43634
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43635
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43636
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-43637
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2023-47108
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-12886
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-21635
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-25621
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-41260
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-41265
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-44905
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-52284
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-53412
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-58259
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-58260
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-58267
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-58269
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-6717
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-0426
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-10543
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-10545
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-10630
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-10678
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-10954
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11374
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11375
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11393
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11579
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11621
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11776
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11777
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-11794
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12044
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12419
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12421
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12559
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12689
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-12756
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13281
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13324
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13352
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13353
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13357
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13425
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13523
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13767
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13821
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13870
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-13888
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14273
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14350
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14435
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14443
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14525
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14573
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14764
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14822
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14986
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14987
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15107
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-15558
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21613
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-22870
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-22873
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-23266
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-23267
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-26625
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-27093
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-2786
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-2842
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-2843
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-31133
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-34410
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-34429
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-34430
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41115
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41117
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41118
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41410
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41436
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-41443
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-44001
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-44004
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-44005
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47906
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47910
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47911
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47912
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47913
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-47914
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-48731
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-49221
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-4953
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-50180
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-50946
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-51667
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-5187
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-52490
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-52565
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-52881
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-52894
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-52931
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-53514
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-53857
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-53884
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-53910
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54123
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54286
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54287
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54288
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54289
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54290
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54291
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54293
suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-54376
Left out here: 1,546 references and the rest of 4 source descriptions. The JSON record has them.