Answer in brief
CVE-2025-13462 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in tarfile: Skip DIRTYPE normalization during GNU LONGNAME/LONGLINK handling. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Python Software Foundation/CPython (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
Answer in brief
CVE-2025-13462 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in tarfile: Skip DIRTYPE normalization during GNU LONGNAME/LONGLINK handling. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Python Software Foundation/CPython (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps Python Software Foundation/CPython (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| Python Software Foundation/CPythongeneric | >=0 <3.10.21 || >=3.11.0 <3.11.16 || >=3.12.0 <3.12.14 || >=3.13.0 <3.13.13 || >=3.14.0 <3.14.4 || >=3.15.0a1 <3.15.0a8 | 3.10.21, 3.11.16, 3.12.14, 3.13.13, 3.14.4, 3.15.0a8 |
Published upstream
Mar 12, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 13, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 13, 2026
The "tarfile" module would still apply normalization of AREGTYPE (\x00) blocks to DIRTYPE, even while processing a multi-block member such as GNUTYPE_LONGNAME or GNUTYPE_LONGLINK. This could result in a crafted tar archive being misinterpreted by the tarfile module compared to other implementations.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps Python Software Foundation/CPython (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| Python Software Foundation/CPythongeneric | >=0 <3.10.21 || >=3.11.0 <3.11.16 || >=3.12.0 <3.12.14 || >=3.13.0 <3.13.13 || >=3.14.0 <3.14.4 || >=3.15.0a1 <3.15.0a8 | 3.10.21, 3.11.16, 3.12.14, 3.13.13, 3.14.4, 3.15.0a8 |
Published upstream
Mar 12, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 13, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 13, 2026
The "tarfile" module would still apply normalization of AREGTYPE (\x00) blocks to DIRTYPE, even while processing a multi-block member such as GNUTYPE_LONGNAME or GNUTYPE_LONGLINK. This could result in a crafted tar archive being misinterpreted by the tarfile module compared to other implementations.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.