Weakness (CWE)
CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
How to prevent it (3 mitigations)
-
Implementation, Operation
If there is a known list of applications, IP, hostname, and/or domains to which the product is allowed to communicate, then use allowlists to ensure that outgoing requests are restricted to these known entities. The allowlists could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation [REF-1511].
-
Implementation, Operation
If the product is expected to be able to connect to arbitrary IP addresses or domains, consider using a denylist that includes private network addresses, internal domain names, etc. The denylist could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation [REF-1511].
-
Implementation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue."
Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
When constructing outgoing requests from input strings, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set based on the expected value of the parameter in the request. This will indirectly limit the scope of an attack, but this technique is less important than proper output encoding and escaping.
Source: MITRE CWE-918
1,874 results · Clear filters · Feed
-
Medium 5.3
An issue in Chamilo v1.11.* up to v1.11.18 allows attackers to execute a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) and obtain …
-
Medium 6.5CVE-2023-32750 Public exploit
Pydio Cells through 4.1.2 allows SSRF. For longer running processes, Pydio Cells allows for the creation of jobs, which…
-
Medium 4.9
Server-side request forgery vulnerability exists in CONPROSYS HMI System (CHS) versions prior to 3.5.3. A user who can …
-
Medium 6.3
yiwent Vip Video Analysis title.php server-side request forgery
A vulnerability has been found in yiwent Vip Video Analysis 1.0 and classified as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file data/title.php. The manipulation of the argument titurl leads to server-side request forgery. Th…
-
Medium 6.3
JIZHICMS TemplateController.php index server-side request forgery
A vulnerability was found in JIZHICMS 2.4.5. It has been classified as critical. Affected is the function index of the file TemplateController.php. The manipulation of the argument webapi leads to server-side request forgery. It is possible to launch the atta…
-
Medium 5.8
Teltonika’s Remote Management System versions prior to 4.10.0 contain a virtual private network (VPN) hub feature for c…
-
Medium 6.5CVE-2023-23169 Public exploit
Synapsoft pdfocus 1.17 is vulnerable to local file inclusion and server-side request forgery Directory Traversal.
-
Medium 5.1
Server Side Request Forgery Vulnerability in Western Digital My Cloud Devices
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow a rogue server on the local network to modify its URL to point back to the loopback adapter was addressed in Western Digital My Cloud OS 5 devices. This could allow the URL to exploit other vul…
-
Medium 6.5
Microsoft SharePoint Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability
Microsoft SharePoint Server Information Disclosure Vulnerability
-
Medium 5.3CVE-2023-30019 Scanner template
imgproxy is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery
imgproxy <=3.14.0 is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) due to a lack of sanitization of the imageURL parameter.
-
Medium 4.1
In JetBrains Hub before 2023.1.15725 SSRF protection in Auth Module integration was missing
-
Medium 4.9
Apache Superset: Possible SSRF on import datasets
A malicious actor who has been authenticated and granted specific permissions in Apache Superset may use the import dataset feature in order to conduct Server-Side Request Forgery attacks and query internal resources on behalf of the server where Superset is …
-
Medium 4.3
An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.1.7, 11.2.x before 11.2.4, and 11.3.x befo…
-
Medium 4.3
OX App Suite before 7.10.6-rev30 allows SSRF because changing a POP3 account disregards the deny-list.
-
Medium 4.3
OX App Suite before 7.10.6-rev30 allows SSRF because e-mail account discovery disregards the deny-list and thus can be …
-
Medium 6.3
yuan1994 tpAdmin Upload.php remote server-side request forgery
** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in yuan1994 tpAdmin 1.3.12. Affected is the function remote of the file application\admin\controller\Upload.php. The manipulation of the argument url leads to server-…
-
Medium 6.5
BudiBase Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability
Budibase is a low code platform for creating internal tools, workflows, and admin panels. Versions prior to 2.4.3 (07 March 2023) are vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery. This can lead to an attacker gaining access to a Budibase AWS secret key. Users of…
-
Medium 6.5
request-baskets vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery
request-baskets up to v1.2.1 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the component /api/baskets/{name}. This vulnerability allows attackers to access network resources and sensitive information via a crafted API request.
-
Medium 6.3
OTCMS URL Parameter info_deal.php UseCurl server-side request forgery
A vulnerability was found in OTCMS 6.72. It has been classified as critical. Affected is the function UseCurl of the file /admin/info_deal.php of the component URL Parameter Handler. The manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. It is possible to lau…
-
Medium 5.9
Discourse's SSRF protection missing for some FastImage requests
Discourse is an open-source discussion platform. Prior to version 3.1.0.beta3 of the `beta` and `tests-passed` branches, some user provided URLs were being passed to FastImage without SSRF protection. Insufficient protections could enable attackers to trigger…
-
Medium 5.7
Discourse vulnerable to SSRF protection bypass possible with IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses
Discourse is an open-source discussion platform. Prior to version 3.1.0.beta3 of the `beta` and `tests-passed` branches, attackers are able to bypass Discourse's server-side request forgery (SSRF) protection for private IPv4 addresses by using a IPv4-mapped I…
-
Medium 6.1
Server-Side Request Forgery in Request
The Request package through 2.88.1 for Node.js allows a bypass of SSRF mitigations via an attacker-controller server that does a cross-protocol redirect (HTTP to HTTPS, or HTTPS to HTTP). NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer suppo…
-
Medium 6.5
Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence platform
In SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence Platform - version 420, 430, an attacker can control a malicious BOE server, forcing the application server to connect to its own CMS, leading to a high impact on availability.
-
Medium 6.5
Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence platform
In SAP BusinessObjects Business Intelligence Platform (Web Services) - versions 420, 430, an attacker can control a malicious BOE server, forcing the application server to connect to its own admintools, leading to a high impact on availability.
-
Medium 5.0
Directus vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery On File Import
Directus is a real-time API and App dashboard for managing SQL database content. Directus is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) when importing a file from a remote web server (POST to `/files/import`). An attacker can bypass the security control…
-
Medium 6.3
MuYuCMS getFile.html server-side request forgery
A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in MuYuCMS 2.2. This affects an unknown part of the file /admin.php/update/getFile.html. The manipulation of the argument url leads to server-side request forgery. It is possible to initiate the attack rem…
-
Medium 6.3
Authenticated Blind Server Side Request Forgery via the ‘search_listener’ Search Parameter in Splunk Enterprise
In Splunk Enterprise versions below 8.1.13, 8.2.10, and 9.0.4, the ‘search_listener’ parameter in a search allows for a blind server-side request forgery (SSRF) by an authenticated user. The initiator of the request cannot see the response without the presenc…
-
Medium 5.3
Nextcloud Server vulnerable to SSRF via filter bypass due to lax checking on IPs
Nextcloud Server is the file server software for Nextcloud, a self-hosted productivity platform. Nextcloud Server prior to 24.0.8 and 23.0.12 and Nextcloud Enterprise server prior to 24.0.8 and 23.0.12 are vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). Att…
-
Medium 6.8
Server-Side Request Forgery
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), Improperly Controlled Modification of Dynamically-Determined Object Attributes, Improper Restriction of Excessive Authentication Attempts vulnerability in YugaByte, Inc. Yugabyte Managed allows Accessing Functionality Not P…
-
Medium 6.5
Server-Side Request Forgery in Smartpower Web
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Group Arge Energy and Control Systems Smartpower Web allows : Server Side Request Forgery. This issue affects Smartpower Web: before 23.01.01.
-
Medium 5.0
Blind SSRF via server URL input in the Nextcloud Mail app
Nextcloud mail is an email app for the nextcloud home server platform. In affected versions the SMTP, IMAP and Sieve host fields allowed to scan for internal services and servers reachable from within the local network of the Nextcloud Server. It is recommend…
-
Medium 6.5
In dotCMS 5.x-22.06, TempFileAPI allows a user to create a temporary file based on a passed in URL, while attempting to…
-
Medium 5.3
safeurl-python contains Server-Side Request Forgery
isInList in the safeurl-python package before 1.2 for Python has an insufficiently restrictive regular expression for external domains, leading to SSRF.
-
Medium 5.0
Haven 5d15944 allows Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the feed[url]= Feeds functionality. Authenticated users wit…
-
Medium 4.3
A blind SSRF vulnerability was identified in all versions of GitLab EE prior to 15.4.6, 15.5 prior to 15.5.5, and 15.6 …
-
Medium 6.5
A Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in Tenable.sc due to improper validation of session & user-ac…
-
Medium 6.5
An SSRF issue was discovered in Reprise License Manager (RLM) web interface through 14.2BL4 that allows remote attacker…
-
Medium 4.4
A vulnerability in Cisco TelePresence CE and RoomOS Software could allow an authenticated, local attacker to bypass acc…
-
Medium 5.3
perfSONAR before 4.4.6, when performing participant discovery, incorrectly uses an HTTP request header value to determi…
-
Medium 5.5
Ariadne Component Library Url.php server-side request forgery
A vulnerability was found in Ariadne Component Library up to 2.x. It has been classified as critical. Affected is an unknown function of the file src/url/Url.php. The manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. Upgrading to version 3.0 is able to addre…