CVE 9.9 CRITICAL

Roxy-WI: Authenticated arbitrary file write on every managed load balancer (and downstream RCE) via WAF rule save `config_file_name`_CVE-2026-45556

9.9 / 10
CRITICAL
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

Description

Roxy-WI is a web interface for managing Haproxy, Nginx, Apache and Keepalived servers. In versions 8.2.6.4 and prior, POST /waf/<service>/<server_ip>/rule/<rule_id>/save accepts a config_file_name form field that is passed straight through to config_mod.master_slave_upload_and_restart(...) as the destination path. The validation chain (_replace_config_path_to_correct → check_is_conf) only requires the path to contain a hard-coded service substring (nginx/haproxy/apache2/httpd/keepalived) and the substring conf or cfg, and to not contain ... The encoded-slash substitution 92 → / is applied before the substring check, so the attacker can build any absolute path anywhere on the LB filesystem as long as it satisfies those substring constraints. The body of the WAF rule (config form field) is written verbatim to that path. By choosing a filename like 92etc92cron.d92nginx_cfg_evil (resolving to /etc/cron.d/nginx_cfg_evil), an attacker drops a cron entry on the load balancer with attacker-controlled content. Cron parses the file on its next scan, executing the embedded job as root — full RCE on every load balancer the caller's group manages. At time of publication, there are no publicly available patches.

AI Analysis

Authenticated arbitrary file write on every managed load balancer via WAF rule save, leading to full RCE

Basic Information

ID CVE-2026-45556
Source GitHub_M
Published Jun 10, 2026 at 14:00

Affected Product

Vendor roxy-wi
Product roxy-wi
Version <= 8.2.6.4
Affected Versions roxy-wi roxy-wi <= 8.2.6.4

CWE Classification

AI Assessment

AI Score 9.9 / 10
AI Severity Critical
Vendor Roxy-WI
Product Roxy-WI
Version <= 8.2.6.4

References

💭 Join the Security Discussion

🔒 Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.