CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2026-25500

CVE-2026-25500 — Rack's Stored XSS in Rack::Directory via javascript: filenames rendered into anchor href

Rack is a modular Ruby web server interface. Prior to versions 2.2.22, 3.1.20, and 3.2.5, `Rack::Directory` generates an HTML directory index where each file entry is rendered as a clickable link. If a file exists on disk whose basename starts with the `javascript:` scheme (e.g. `javascript:alert(1)`), the generated index contains an anchor whose `href` is exactly `javascript:alert(1)`. Clicking the entry executes JavaScript in the browser (demonstrated with `alert(1)`). Versions 2.2.22, 3.1.20, and 3.2.5 fix the issue.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, GitHub_M

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

0%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

rack

rack

CVSS base

5.4

MEDIUM

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

None

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

Products (1)

rack

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
5.4CVSS 3.1MEDIUMcvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-79

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • rackevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-79other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.