CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
LOW

CVE-2026-35375

CVE-2026-35375 — uutils coreutils split Local Data Integrity Issue via Lossy Filename Encoding

A logic error in the split utility of uutils coreutils causes the corruption of output filenames when provided with non-UTF-8 prefix or suffix inputs. The implementation utilizes to_string_lossy() when constructing chunk filenames, which automatically rewrites invalid byte sequences into the UTF-8 replacement character (U+FFFD). This behavior diverges from GNU split, which preserves raw pathname bytes intact. In environments utilizing non-UTF-8 encodings, this vulnerability leads to the creation of files with incorrect names, potentially causing filename collisions, broken automation, or the misdirection of output data.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, canonical

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

uutils

coreutils

CVSS base

3.3

LOW

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

PoC

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)

uutils

Products (1)

coreutils

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
3.3CVSS 3.1LOW——cvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-176

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

  • uutilsevery CVE for this vendor
  • CWE-176other 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.