CVE-2026-118654: Echo static file middleware route protection bypass via encoded dot-dot traversal
Summary
Echo v5.2.0 contains a bypass of the fix for GHSA-vfp3-v2gw-7wfq. The fix rejects encoded path separators such as %2F and %5C before static file path unescaping, but two traversal forms still bypass route-level middleware protections for static files.
The primary bypass uses encoded dot-dot segments. A request such as /public/%2E%2E/admin/secret.txt passes the encoded-separator guard, is unescaped to public/../admin/secret.txt, then path.Clean resolves it to admin/secret.txt. If /admin/ is protected by middleware but the static filesystem is mounted at /, the protected file is returned through the public static route.
A second bypass exists when UseEscapedPathForMatching=true. In that mode, the router normalizes encoded separators before the static handler checks the wildcard. The handler receives a decoded wildcard with no % characters, so the encoded-separator guard does not run on the original encoded path.
Impact
An unauthenticated attacker can read files that an application intended to protect with route-level middleware, when those files are also reachable through a static filesystem mount after path normalization.
The high-severity variant works with the default router configuration and requires only encoded dot-dot path segments. The direct protected route returns 403, while the public static route returns the protected file content.
The UseEscapedPathForMatching=true variant is lower severity because it requires a non-default router configuration.
Affected versions
Tested vulnerable:
- github.com/labstack/echo/v5 v5.2.0 - Current master at 5786024ea4d85c01784796e8aa7aac53e007b39b
No patched version is currently known.
Policy and version checks
GitHub Private Vulnerability Reporting is enabled for labstack/echo. The repository has a root SECURITY.md and accepts security reports through GitHub Security Advisories.
The vulnerable code was revalidated on both current master and the latest release tag:
- Current master: 5786024ea4d85c01784796e8aa7aac53e007b39b - Latest release: v5.2.0, published June 14 2026 - Package: github.com/labstack/echo/v5
The same focused Go tests pass on the checked out v5.2.0 / master commit, proving the bypass remains present in the latest released version and latest main branch at the time of reporting.
Reproduction
The following application shape reproduces the high-severity bypass:
go e := echo.New()
g := e.Group("/admin", func(next echo.HandlerFunc) echo.HandlerFunc { return func(c echo.Context) error { return echo.NewHTTPError(http.StatusForbidden) } }) g.GET("/", handler)
e.StaticFS("/", fsysWithAdminSecret)
Control request:
http GET /admin/secret.txt
Observed result:
text 403 Forbidden
Bypass request:
http GET /public/%2E%2E/admin/secret.txt
Observed result:
text 200 OK TOP-SECRET
For the non-default router variant:
go e := echo.New() e.router = echo.NewRouter(echo.RouterConfig{ UseEscapedPathForMatching: true, })
g := e.Group("/admin", authMiddlewareReturning403) g.GET("/", handler)
e.StaticFS("/", fsysWithAdminSecret)
Bypass request:
http GET /public%2F..%2Fadmin%2Fsecret.txt
Observed result:
text 200 OK TOP-SECRET
Proof of concept evidence
I added focused tests against the current Echo codebase. The tests exercise both StaticDirectoryHandler and the static middleware path.
Command:
bash go test -run TestHostile -v ./...
Observed result:
text === RUN TestHostileStaticDirectoryHandlerEncodedSeparatorsBlocked --- PASS: TestHostileStaticDirectoryHandlerEncodedSeparatorsBlocked (0.00s) === RUN TestHostileStaticDirectoryHandlerEncodedDotDotBypass --- PASS: TestHostileStaticDirectoryHandlerEncodedDotDotBypass (0.00s) === RUN TestHostileUseEscapedPathForMatchingBypass --- PASS: TestHostileUseEscapedPathForMatchingBypass (0.00s) PASS ok github.com/labstack/echo/v5 0.013s === RUN TestHostileStaticMiddlewareEncodedSeparatorsBlocked --- PASS: TestHostileStaticMiddlewareEncodedSeparatorsBlocked (0.01s) === RUN TestHostileStaticMiddlewareEncodedDotDotBypass --- PASS: TestHostileStaticMiddlewareEncodedDotDotBypass (0.00s) === RUN TestHostileStaticMiddlewareDisablePathUnescaping --- PASS: TestHostileStaticMiddlewareDisablePathUnescaping (0.00s) PASS ok github.com/labstack/echo/v5/middleware 0.012s
The control tests also confirm that the new fix blocks encoded separators such as %2F, %5C, double-encoded slash values, null bytes, and overlong slash encodings.
Root cause
The fix for GHSA-vfp3 uses a denylist-style guard that checks for encoded path separators before unescaping the static wildcard. This blocks %2F and %5C, but does not block encoded traversal segments such as %2E%2E.
The vulnerable flow is:
1. The static route wildcard accepts public/%2E%2E/admin/secret.txt. 2. The encoded-separator guard sees no %2F or %5C and allows the request. 3. The handler unescapes the wildcard to public/../admin/secret.txt. 4. path.Clean resolves it to admin/secret.txt. 5. The file is served through the public static route instead of the protected /admin/ route.
For UseEscapedPathForMatching=true, the router decodes the path before the static handler sees the wildcard, so the handler cannot detect that encoded separators were used in the original request.
Remediation
Do not rely only on detecting encoded separators. Reject encoded traversal sequences before unescaping, and reject normalized wildcard values that cross route or static mount boundaries.
Possible fixes:
1. Extend the pre-unescape guard to reject encoded dot segments such as %2E and %2E%2E in path components. 2. After unescaping, reject any wildcard where cleaning changes the path in a way that removes . or .. components. 3. For UseEscapedPathForMatching=true, run the static-file guard against the original escaped request path before router normalization, or preserve metadata that the matched wildcard came from encoded separators.
Patches
Fixed in github.com/labstack/echo/v5 v5.4.0 and github.com/labstack/echo/v4 v4.16.0. The Static middleware and StaticDirectoryHandler (used by Echo.Static, Echo.StaticFS, Group.Static and Group.StaticFS) no longer serve paths with a ., .. or empty segment, including after path unescaping. The encoded variant of the first vector (/public/%2E%2E/admin/secret.txt) was already fixed in v5.2.1 and v4.15.4 (GHSA-vfp3-v2gw-7wfq).
Workarounds
Put a reverse proxy in front of the application that normalizes request paths (removes dot segments and merges slashes), or keep protected files outside the served directory.
Other sources
Echo is a Go web framework. Prior to 4.16.0 and 5.4.0, Echo's static file handlers can normalize dot segments after route matching and serve a file through a public static route even though the corresponding direct path is protected by route-level middleware. An unauthenticated attacker can read files that an application intended to protect with route-level middleware, when those files are also reachable through a static filesystem mount after path normalization. This vulnerability is the result of an incomplete fix for CVE-2026-55677. This issue is fixed in 4.16.0 and 5.4.0.
— MITRE
Affected Software
Remediation
Recommended actions to resolve this vulnerability, in priority order.
- Upgrade
Upgrade
go/github.com/labstack/echo/v4to a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in 4.16.0 - Upgrade
Upgrade
go/github.com/labstack/echo/v5to a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in 5.4.0 - Upgrade
Upgrade
github.com/labstack/echo/v5to a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in v5.4.0 - Upgrade
Upgrade
github.com/labstack/echo/v4to a version that resolves this vulnerability.Fixed in v4.16.0 - Compensating control
Put a reverse proxy in front of the application that normalizes request paths by removing dot segments and merging slashes, or keep protected files outside the served directory.
Event History
Frequently Asked Questions
Which deployments are exposed to this issue?
Applications using Echo versions before 4.16.0 or 5.4.0 are exposed if a file intended to be protected by route-level middleware is also reachable through a public static filesystem mount after path normalization.
Does exploitation require authentication or user interaction?
No. The vulnerability can be exploited by an unauthenticated attacker and does not require user interaction, although the attacker must be able to reach a relevant public static route and use encoded dot-dot traversal.
What is the impact of a successful exploit?
An attacker can read files that the application intended to restrict with route-level middleware. The provided vector indicates confidentiality impact only; integrity and availability are not affected.
What versions contain the fix?
Upgrade to Echo 4.16.0 or later in the 4.x line, or 5.4.0 or later in the 5.x line.