Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV

CVE-2026-22870 — guarddog

Fix: DataDog/guarddog@c3fb07b

CVE-2026-22870 is a CWE-409 vulnerability in guarddog. A fix is available for guarddog — see the affected versions and patch details below.

GuardDog Zip Bomb Vulnerability in safe_extract() Allows DoS

Also known asGHSA-ffj4-jq7m-9g6vPYSEC-2026-1429
Published
Jan 13, 2026
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 21, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-22870.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs43th percentile — riskier than 43% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍guarddog

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

GuardDog's safe_extract() function does not validate decompressed file sizes when extracting ZIP archives (wheels, eggs), allowing attackers to cause denial of service through zip bombs. A malicious package can consume gigabytes of disk space from a few megabytes of compressed data.

Vulnerability Details

Affected Component: guarddog/utils/archives.py - safe_extract() function
Vulnerability Type: CWE-409 - Improper Handling of Highly Compressed Data (Zip Bomb)
Severity: HIGH (CVSS ~8)
Attack Vector: Network (malicious package uploaded to PyPI/npm) or local

Root Cause

The safe_extract() function handles TAR files securely using the tarsafe library, but ZIP file extraction has no size validation:

elif zipfile.is_zipfile(source_archive):
    with zipfile.ZipFile(source_archive, "r") as zip:
        for file in zip.namelist():
            zip.extract(file, path=os.path.join(target_directory, file))

Missing protections:

  • ❌ No decompressed size limit
  • ❌ No compression ratio validation
  • ❌ No file count limits
  • ❌ No total extracted size validation

Impact

Denial of Service Scenarios

1. CI/CD Pipeline Disruption

  • Attacker publishes malicious package to PyPI
  • Developer adds package to requirements.txt
  • CI/CD runs GuardDog scan
  • Disk fills (GitHub Actions: standard 14GB limit)
  • All deployments blocked

2. Resource Exhaustion

  • Local development environments
  • Security scanning infrastructure
  • Automated scanning systems
  • Docker containers with limited disk

3. Supply Chain Attack Amplification

  • Single malicious package blocks security scanning
  • Prevents detection of other malicious packages
  • Forces manual intervention
  • Increases security team workload

Recommended Fix

Add size validation for ZIP files similar to what tarsafe provides for TAR files

Configuration Options

Make limits configurable via environment variables or config file

Additional Improvements

  1. Add warning logs when archives approach limits
  2. Provide clear error messages for users
  3. Document limits in user-facing documentation
  4. Add tests for zip bomb detection
  5. Consider using a safe ZIP library (similar to tarsafe)

Credit

Reported by: Charbel (dwbruijn)

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIguarddogall versions2.7.1pip install --upgrade 'guarddog==2.7.1'

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for guarddog, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update guarddog to 2.7.1 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-22870 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-22870 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-22870. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary GuardDog's `safe_extract()` function does not validate decompressed file sizes when extracting ZIP archives (wheels, eggs), allowing attackers to cause denial of service through zip bombs. A malicious package can consume gigabytes of disk space from a few megabytes of compressed data. ## Vulnerability Details **Affected Component:** `guarddog/utils/archives.py` - `safe_extract()` function **Vulnerability Type:** CWE-409 - Improper Handling of Highly Compressed Data (Zip Bomb) **Severity:** HIGH (CVSS ~8) **Attack Vector:** Network (malicious package uploaded to PyPI/npm) or
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-22870 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-22870 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2026-22870: guarddog DoS | O3 Security