BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-32766High confidence

astral-tokio-tar insufficiently validates PAX extensions during extraction

astral-sh · tokio-tar

Official source article: GitHub GHSA-6GX3-4362-RF54 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.

1.7LowCVSS 4.0
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityLowOperational priority:Low, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.30% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs astral-sh tokio-tar and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: No default targetRemediation target: Normal maintenance

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

3 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 1 affected package state shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcerust-astral-tokio-tarAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcerust-astral-tokio-tarVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.0.6.0-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcerust-astral-tokio-tarVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.0.6.0-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Open-source package ranges1 source-attributed range

These OSV and GitHub advisory ranges apply only to the named package and ecosystem. A listed fixed version is not a universal product patch or proof that an update is installed.

Ecosystem and packageAffected rangeFirst fixed versionEvidence
rustastral-tokio-tar<= 0.5.60.6.0GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 24 Apr 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-13414

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Low technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 1 structured product or package state remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

astral-tokio-tar is a tar archive reading/writing library for async Rust. In versions 0.5.6 and earlier, malformed PAX extensions were silently skipped when parsing tar archives. This silent skipping (rather than rejection) of invalid PAX extensions could be used as a building block for a parser differential, for example by silently skipping a malformed GNU “long link” extension so that a subsequent parser would misinterpret the extension. In practice, exploiting this behavior in astral-tokio-tar requires a secondary misbehaving tar parser, i.e. one that insufficiently validates malformed PAX extensions and interprets them rather than skipping or erroring on them. This vulnerability is considered low-severity as it requires a separate vulnerability against any unrelated tar parser. This issue has been fixed in version 0.6.0.

What

astral-tokio-tar is a tar archive reading/writing library for async Rust. In versions 0.5.6 and earlier, malformed PAX extensions were silently skipped when parsing tar archives. This silent skipping (rather than rejection) of invalid PAX extensions could be used as a building block for a parser differential, for example by silently skipping a malformed GNU “long link” extension so that a subsequent parser would misinterpret the extension. In practice, exploiting this behavior in astral-tokio-tar requires a secondary misbehaving tar parser, i.e. one that insufficiently validates malformed PAX extensions and interprets them rather than skipping or erroring on them. This vulnerability is considered low-severity as it requires a separate vulnerability against any unrelated tar parser. This issue has been fixed in version 0.6.0.

Why

Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

astral-tokio-tar is a tar archive reading/writing library for async Rust. In versions 0.5.6 and earlier, malformed PAX extensions were silently skipped when parsing tar archives. This silent skipping (rather than rejection) of invalid PAX extensions could be used as a building block for a parser differential, for example by silently skipping a malformed GNU “long link” extension so that a subsequent parser would misinterpret the extension. In practice, exploiting this behavior in astral-tokio-tar requires a secondary misbehaving tar parser, i.e. one that insufficiently validates malformed PAX extensions and interprets them rather than skipping or erroring on them. This vulnerability is considered low-severity as it requires a separate vulnerability against any unrelated tar parser. This issue has been fixed in version 0.6.0.

Why

Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
a network path → Interpretation Conflict → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
Security boundary
Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-436 ↗

CWE-436: Interpretation Conflict. Product A handles inputs or steps differently than Product B, which causes A to perform incorrect actions based on its perception of B's state.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.VCNoneVulnerable-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.VILowVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.VANoneVulnerable-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SCNoneSubsequent-system confidentiality: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SINoneSubsequent-system integrity: No direct loss is represented by this metric.SANoneSubsequent-system availability: No direct loss is represented by this metric.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticatedCWE-436
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260325Security Bulletin 25 Mar 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 25 Mar 2026, published on 25 March 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-011666Astralのastral-tokio-tarにおける解釈の競合に関する脆弱性

astral-tokio-tarは、非同期Rust向けのtarアーカイブ読み書きライブラリです。バージョン0.5.6以前では、tarアーカイブの解析時に不正なPAX拡張を無言でスキップしていました。この不正なPAX拡張を拒否せずに無言でスキップする挙動は、例えば不正なGNUの「long link」拡張を無言でスキップすることで、後続のパーサーがその拡張を誤って解釈してしまうなどのパーサー差異を生み出す構成要素として悪用される可能性があります。実際には、この挙動を悪用するには、別の不適切に動作するtarパーサー、つまり不正なPAX拡張を十分に検証せずにスキップやエラー処理を行わずに解釈してしまうパーサーが必要です。この脆弱性は無関係なtarパーサーに対する別の脆弱性が必要であるため、低い深刻度と評価されています。本問題はバージョン0.6.0で修正されました。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
tokio-tar: < 0.6.0
Fixed
0.6.0.
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 20 Mar 2026 · Last source change 20 Mar 2026, 18:09 UTC · CWE-436 · Interpretation Conflict

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-13414
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-32766 · cve.blacktree.nl