Skip to content

MariaDB Connector/J does not enforce allowLocalInfile=false on server-initiated LOCAL INFILE requests

Low severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jul 10, 2026 in mariadb-corporation/mariadb-connector-j • Updated Sep 17, 2026

Package

maven org.mariadb.jdbc:mariadb-java-client (Maven)

Affected versions

< 2.7.14
>= 3.0.0, < 3.3.5
>= 3.4.0, < 3.4.3
>= 3.5.0, < 3.5.9

Patched versions

2.7.14
3.3.5
3.4.3
3.5.9

Description

Summary

MariaDB Connector/J does not enforce allowLocalInfile=false when
processing server-initiated LOCAL INFILE requests (protocol packet
type 0xfb). However, exploitation is constrained: the server can
only request the exact filename the client already included in its
LOAD DATA LOCAL INFILE query, it cannot redirect to arbitrary paths.

Details

When a client executes LOAD DATA LOCAL INFILE '/path/to/file', the
connector sends the filename to the server as part of the COM_QUERY.
A rogue or MitM server responds with a 0xfb packet echoing that
same filename. The connector, without checking allowLocalInfile,
transmits the file content.

The bypass is therefore limited to the file the application itself
intended to load. The attacker cannot escalate to other files
(e.g. /etc/passwd) unless the application's own query targets them.

The real-world risk is:

  • An application that uses LOAD DATA LOCAL INFILE on potentially
    sensitive files (credentials, exports, configs) and connects over
    an untrusted network.
  • allowLocalInfile=false is supposed to disable this entire
    mechanism as a defense-in-depth measure, but the flag is ignored.

Impact

The security guarantee of allowLocalInfile=false is not upheld,
but practical exploitation requires both a MitM/rogue server and an
application that actively uses LOCAL INFILE on sensitive data.

Credit

Reported by tharavel

References

@rusher rusher published to mariadb-corporation/mariadb-connector-j Jul 10, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Sep 17, 2026
Reviewed Sep 17, 2026
Last updated Sep 17, 2026

Severity

Low

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(29th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Access Control

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-61700

GHSA ID

GHSA-wxmm-q36w-r9xj

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.