filelock: StrictSoftFileLock follows a symbolic link swapped in at <path>.filelock and creates claim files in a directory another local…
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in 4.2.1
- Who is exposed
- Not reported
Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 4.2.1.
- Last modified
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 26/100 · provisional
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
The filelock Python library's StrictSoftFileLock and AsyncStrictSoftFileLock can be abused by a local attacker with a low-privilege account, without any user action, to create claim files in other writable directories, strand claims so another lock times out, or remove live claims so two processes enter a lock's critical section. The lock acquisition path requires winning a race to swap in a symbolic link, while the claims inspection and recovery paths follow a resting symbolic link and can disclose file names.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
Read the original description
filelock is a platform-independent file lock for Python. From 3.30.0 until 4.2.1, On POSIX platforms, StrictSoftFileLock and AsyncStrictSoftFileLock validate the coordination directory in _ensure_protocol_directory but later reach the claims directory through _open_directory by pathname, allowing a local account that can rename the coordination name to swap in a symbolic link between check and use during acquisition. That race can create and leave claim files in another writable directory or strand claims in a different strict lock so the second lock times out. Separately, the claims property and force_break follow a resting symbolic link without a race when the lock user inspects or recovers the lock. Claims inspection discloses a file name to the other account only if the resulting exception text or claim_name reaches that account through a shared log, CI output, or error report. A blind force_break recovery that removes live claims from another strict lock can allow two processes into that lock's critical section; this path reaches other strict locks, not arbitrary files. This issue is fixed in version 4.2.1.
cve.now Index
- Exploitation?/40Unknown. No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure?/25Unknown. No advisory context yet
- Reach20/20filelock: 138.8M downloads a week
- Severity5.8/10CVSS 5.8
- No patch0/5No signal
What would change the score
- Would score about 81 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 76 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 48 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed
Impact
- Widely used
filelock has 138.8m weekly downloads.Source: pypistats.org
47.2k packages depend on filelock.Source: deps.dev
What to do
Upgrade to a fixed version: 4.2.1.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
Affected versions
- tox-dev filelock
From 3.30.0 · fixed in 4.2.1
- filelockPyPI
From 3.30.0 · fixed in 4.2.1
Evidence 5
- Advisory
- Repository
- Repository
- Repository
- Repository
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-112938
Is CVE-2026-112938 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-112938?
filelock: from 3.30.0 before 4.2.1. filelock (PyPI): from 3.30.0 before 4.2.1.Source: cve.now feed data
How do I fix CVE-2026-112938?
Upgrade to a fixed version: 4.2.1.Source: cve.now feed data