Skip to content

🚨 [security] [ruby] Update rack 2.2.20 → 2.2.22 (patch)#1147

Merged
depfu[bot] merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
depfu/update/rack-2.2.22
Feb 17, 2026
Merged

🚨 [security] [ruby] Update rack 2.2.20 → 2.2.22 (patch)#1147
depfu[bot] merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
depfu/update/rack-2.2.22

Conversation

@depfu
Copy link
Contributor

@depfu depfu bot commented Feb 17, 2026


🚨 Your current dependencies have known security vulnerabilities 🚨

This dependency update fixes known security vulnerabilities. Please see the details below and assess their impact carefully. We recommend to merge and deploy this as soon as possible!


Here is everything you need to know about this update. Please take a good look at what changed and the test results before merging this pull request.

What changed?

↗️ rack (indirect, 2.2.20 → 2.2.22) · Repo · Changelog

Security Advisories 🚨

🚨 Rack has a Directory Traversal via Rack:Directory

Summary

Rack::Directory’s path check used a string prefix match on the expanded path. A request like /../root_example/ can escape the configured root if the target path starts with the root string, allowing directory listing outside the intended root.

Details

In directory.rb, File.expand_path(File.join(root, path_info)).start_with?(root) does not enforce a path boundary. If the server root is /var/www/root, a path like /var/www/root_backup passes the check because it shares the same prefix, so Rack::Directory will list that directory also.

Impact

Information disclosure via directory listing outside the configured root when Rack::Directory is exposed to untrusted clients and a directory shares the root prefix (e.g., public2, www_backup).

Mitigation

  • Update to a patched version of Rack that correctly checks the root prefix.
  • Don't name directories with the same prefix as one which is exposed via Rack::Directory.
Release Notes

2.2.21 (from changelog)

Fixed

  • Multipart parser: limit MIME header size check to the unread buffer region to avoid false multipart mime part header too large errors when previously read data accumulates in the scan buffer. (#2392, @alpaca-tc, @willnet, @krororo)

Does any of this look wrong? Please let us know.

Commits

See the full diff on Github. The new version differs by 6 commits:


Depfu Status

Depfu will automatically keep this PR conflict-free, as long as you don't add any commits to this branch yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting with @depfu rebase.

All Depfu comment commands
@​depfu rebase
Rebases against your default branch and redoes this update
@​depfu recreate
Recreates this PR, overwriting any edits that you've made to it
@​depfu merge
Merges this PR once your tests are passing and conflicts are resolved
@​depfu cancel merge
Cancels automatic merging of this PR
@​depfu close
Closes this PR and deletes the branch
@​depfu reopen
Restores the branch and reopens this PR (if it's closed)
@​depfu pause
Ignores all future updates for this dependency and closes this PR
@​depfu pause [minor|major]
Ignores all future minor/major updates for this dependency and closes this PR
@​depfu resume
Future versions of this dependency will create PRs again (leaves this PR as is)

@depfu depfu bot added the depfu label Feb 17, 2026
@depfu depfu bot merged commit 70ba6a0 into master Feb 17, 2026
1 check passed
@depfu depfu bot deleted the depfu/update/rack-2.2.22 branch February 17, 2026 19:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0 participants