Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.22% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-57171High confidence
Trestle is vulnerable to arbitrary file write via path traversal in author generate commands (Incomplete fix of CVE-2026-46345)
oscal-compass · compliance-trestle
Official source article: GitHub GHSA-R4VP-3VW6-R2X5 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
7.7HighCVSS 3.1
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs oscal-compass compliance-trestle and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Open-source package ranges5 source-attributed ranges
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 package | Affected range | First fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| PyPIcompliance-trestle | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 3.12.4 | 3.12.4 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 1 Oct 2026 |
| PyPIcompliance-trestle | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 4.0.0; fixed 4.1.0 | 4.1.0 | OSV record ↗aggregator derived · 1 Oct 2026 |
| PyPIcompliance-trestle | ECOSYSTEM: introduced 0; fixed 3.12.4; introduced 4.0.0; fixed 4.1.0 | 3.12.4, 4.1.0 | OSV record ↗source linked ecosystem record · 1 Oct 2026 |
| pipcompliance-trestle | < 3.12.4 | 3.12.4 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 24 Sep 2026 |
| pipcompliance-trestle | >= 4.0.0, < 4.1.0 | 4.1.0 | GitHub advisory ↗upstream repository advisory · 24 Sep 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2026-57171 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 3 · finalRed Hat Product Securitycompliance-trestle: Trestle: Arbitrary file write via path traversal in author generate commands
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator
- Summary
- A flaw was found in Compliance-trestle (Trestle). The `catalog-generate`, `profile-generate`, and `ssp-generate` author commands are vulnerable to path traversal. A remote attacker can exploit this by providing a specially crafted output path, allowing them to write arbitrary files outside the intended Trestle workspace. This could lead to the destruction of arbitrary directory trees and potentially indirect code execution if `--force-overwrite` is used.
- Remediation
- Affected
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
Compliance-trestle (Trestle) is a Python SDK and command-line tool for managing OSCAL compliance documents. In versions before 3.12.4 and versions 4.0.0 through 4.0.3, the catalog-generate, profile-generate, and ssp-generate author commands write generated Markdown to an attacker-influenced output path without path-traversal validation, allowing arbitrary file write outside the Trestle workspace. These commands join the user-supplied output argument onto the Trestle root and write to the result, but guard it only with an is_directory_name_allowed() task-name-collision check rather than the PathSecurityValidator.validate_local_path() guard used by the jinja command, so an absolute path or one containing traversal sequences escapes the workspace and writes files under an attacker-chosen location as the invoking process owner. The security boundary is crossed when a trusted CI job, shared service, or wrapper derives the output argument from repository-controlled, tenant-controlled, or otherwise untrusted data while expecting output to stay inside the workspace. When --force-overwrite is used, the selected output directory is first recursively deleted, extending the primitive to destruction of an attacker-chosen directory tree and enabling indirect code execution by overwriting files a pipeline later runs. This issue is fixed in versions 3.12.4 and 4.1.0.
What
Compliance-trestle (Trestle) is a Python SDK and command-line tool for managing OSCAL compliance documents. In versions before 3.12.4 and versions 4.0.0 through 4.0.3, the catalog-generate, profile-generate, and ssp-generate author commands write generated Markdown to an attacker-influenced output path without path-traversal validation, allowing arbitrary file write outside the Trestle workspace. These commands join the user-supplied output argument onto the Trestle root and write to the result, but guard it only with an is_directory_name_allowed() task-name-collision check rather than the PathSecurityValidator.validate_local_path() guard used by the jinja command, so an absolute path or one containing traversal sequences escapes the workspace and writes files under an attacker-chosen location as the invoking process owner. The security boundary is crossed when a trusted CI job, shared service, or wrapper derives the output argument from repository-controlled, tenant-controlled, or otherwise untrusted data while expecting output to stay inside the workspace. When --force-overwrite is used, the selected output directory is first recursively deleted, extending the primitive to destruction of an attacker-chosen directory tree and enabling indirect code execution by overwriting files a pipeline later runs. This issue is fixed in versions 3.12.4 and 4.1.0.
Why
Attacker-controlled path data is not constrained to the intended directory before the application accesses a file.
How
An attacker operating through local access 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
Compliance-trestle (Trestle) is a Python SDK and command-line tool for managing OSCAL compliance documents. In versions before 3.12.4 and versions 4.0.0 through 4.0.3, the catalog-generate, profile-generate, and ssp-generate author commands write generated Markdown to an attacker-influenced output path without path-traversal validation, allowing arbitrary file write outside the Trestle workspace. These commands join the user-supplied output argument onto the Trestle root and write to the result, but guard it only with an is_directory_name_allowed() task-name-collision check rather than the PathSecurityValidator.validate_local_path() guard used by the jinja command, so an absolute path or one containing traversal sequences escapes the workspace and writes files under an attacker-chosen location as the invoking process owner. The security boundary is crossed when a trusted CI job, shared service, or wrapper derives the output argument from repository-controlled, tenant-controlled, or otherwise untrusted data while expecting output to stay inside the workspace. When --force-overwrite is used, the selected output directory is first recursively deleted, extending the primitive to destruction of an attacker-chosen directory tree and enabling indirect code execution by overwriting files a pipeline later runs. This issue is fixed in versions 3.12.4 and 4.1.0.
Why
Attacker-controlled path data is not constrained to the intended directory before the application accesses a file.
How
An attacker operating through local access 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 No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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 None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.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
- local access → Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-22 ↗
CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal'). The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
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 not verified
- Affected
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 25 Aug 2026 · Last source change 27 Aug 2026, 14:34 UTC · CWE-22 · Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-26
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-66225
Product sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · Red Hat Product Security
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD not scheduled
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.Red Hat Product Security ↗
- Before
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator; scap-security-guide.src as a component of Red Hat Hardened Images
- After
- compliance/openshift-compliance-content-rhel8 as a component of File Integrity Operator
- ENISA EUVD mappingEUVD-2026-66225 was added to the official ENISA EUVD mapping for this CVE.ENISA EUVD ↗
- Before
- not recorded
- After
- {"euvdId":"EUVD-2026-66225"}
- Catalogue recordCVE added to the BlackTree catalogue.CNA ↗
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.