HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2025 64118 node tar has a race condition leading to
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 6.1CVE-2025-64118GHSA-29XP-372Q-XQPH

node-tar has a race condition leading to uninitialized memory exposureCVE-2025-64118

Answer in brief

CVE-2025-64118 records a Medium severity (CVSS 6.1) vulnerability in node-tar has a race condition leading to uninitialized memory exposure. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps tar (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Oct 30, 2025Updated Oct 7, 2026Source checked Oct 25, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 7, 2026Material review Oct 7, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 6.1
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 6.1. 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.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps tar (npm). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
tarnpm>=7.5.1 <7.5.27.5.2

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for tar.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update tar to 7.5.2 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Oct 30, 2025

    Evidence: source:nvd:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 7, 2026

    Evidence: source:nvd:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Aug 7, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

### Summary Using `.t` (aka `.list`) with `{ sync: true }` to read tar entry contents returns uninitialized memory contents if tar file was changed on disk to a smaller size while being read. ### Details See: * https://github.com/isaacs/node-tar/issues/445 * https://github.com/isaacs/node-tar/pull/446 * Regression happened in https://github.com/isaacs/node-tar/commit/5330eb04bc43014f216e5c271b40d5c00d45224d ### PoC A: ```js import * as tar from 'tar' import fs from 'node:fs' fs.writeFileSync('tar.test.tmp', Buffer.alloc(1*1024)) // from readme const filesAdded = [] tar.c( { sync: true, file: 'tar.test.tmp.tar', onWriteEntry(entry) { // initially, it's uppercase and 0o644 console.log('adding', entry.path, entry.stat.mode.toString(8)) // make all the paths lowercase entry.path = entry.path.toLowerCase() // make the entry executable entry.stat.mode = 0o755 // in the archive, it's lowercase and 0o755 filesAdded.push([entry.path, entry.stat.mode.toString(8)]) }, }, ['./tar.test.tmp'], ) const a = fs.readFileSync('tar.test.tmp.tar') for (let i = 0; ; i++){ if (i % 10000 === 0) console.log(i) fs.writeFileSync('tar.test.tmp.tar', a) fs.truncateSync('tar.test.tmp.tar', 600) } ``` B (vulnerable): ```js import * as tar from 'tar' import * as fs from 'fs' while (true) { fs.readFileSync(import.meta.filename) tar.t({ sync: true, file: 'tar.test.tmp.tar', onReadEntry: e => e.on('data', b => { const a = b.filter(x => x) if (a.length > 0) console.log(a.toString()) }) }) } ``` Run A and B in parallel on Node.js 22 or >=25.1.0 Dumps `B` memory (wait for some time to observe text data) ### Impact Exposes process memory and could result in e.g. unintentionally (aka attacker-controlled) attempting to process sensitive data rather than tar entry contents. Uninitialized memory can contain unrelated file contents, environment variables, passwords, etc. To execute, an attacker must reduce the file size to boundary between a tar header and body block, in the time between when the tar archive file size is read via `stat`, and the time when the tar archive parser reaches the entry that is truncated. If the file is truncated at a different boundary, then the uninitialized data will very likely not be a valid tar entry, causing the parser to treat the entry as a damaged archive (that is, throwing an error in `strict: true` mode, or by default, skipping the entry harmlessly). This is conditional on using the `sync: true` option to the `tar.list`/`tar.t` method, and the `7.5.1` version specifically. Earlier versions were not affected. This is also conditional to attacker being able to truncate (or induce a truncation/replacement) of a file on disk (e.g. in cache). If the tar file is initially larger than the `opt.maxReadSize` (16kb by default), then uninitialized memory is not exposed to user code, and instead the program enters an infinite loop, causing a DoS rather than an information disclosure vulnerability. By default, `tar.list` does _not_ process tar archive entry body content. So, this is further conditional on the user code doing something with the tar entry file contents in an `onReadEntry` method which would expose the file contents (for example, attempting to parse them in such a way that the uninitialized data could appear in an error message). Other methods in this library (`tar.extract`, etc.) are not affected by this vulnerability.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-362, CWE-367
Source
OSV
Source checked
Oct 25, 2026
References
7 linked sources
Open source record