| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Parse Server is an open source backend that can be deployed to any infrastructure that can run Node.js. In versions 4.2.0 through 7.5.3, and 8.0.0 through 8.3.1-alpha.1, there is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the file upload functionality when trying to upload a Parse.File with uri parameter, allowing execution of an arbitrary URI. The vulnerability stems from a file upload feature in which Parse Server retrieves the file data from a URI that is provided in the request. A request to the provided URI is executed, but the response is not stored in Parse Server's file storage as the server crashes upon receiving the response. This issue is fixed in versions 7.5.4 and 8.4.0-alpha.1. |
| Canarytokens help track activity and actions on a network. Prior to `sha-8ea5315`, Canarytokens.org was vulnerable to a blind SSRF in the Webhook alert feature. When a Canarytoken is created, users choose to receive alerts either via email or via a webhook. If a webhook is supplied when a Canarytoken is first created, the site will make a test request to the supplied URL to ensure it accepts alert notification HTTP requests. No safety checks were performed on the URL, leading to a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability. The SSRF is Blind because the content of the response is not displayed to the creating user; they are simply told whether an error occurred in making the test request. Using the Blind SSRF, it was possible to map out open ports for IPs inside the Canarytokens.org infrastructure. This issue is now patched on Canarytokens.org. Users of self-hosted Canarytokens installations can update by pulling the latest Docker image, or any Docker image after `sha-097d91a`. |
| An issue was discovered in Teledyne FLIR M300 2.00-19. Unauthenticated remote code execution can occur in the web server. An attacker can exploit this by sending a POST request to the vulnerable PHP page. An attacker can elevate to root permissions with Sudo. |
| The Skitter Slideshow plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.5.2 via the /image.php file. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| The Auto Featured Image (Auto Post Thumbnail) plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.1.7 via the upload_to_library AJAX action. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with author-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| The Google Doc Embedder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server Side Request Forgery via the 'gview' shortcode in versions up to, and including, 2.6.4. This can allow authenticated attackers with contributor-level permissions or above to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| The Proofpoint Encryption endpoint of Proofpoint Enterprise Protection contains a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability that allows an authenticated user to relay HTTP requests from the Protection server to otherwise private network addresses. |
| A Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability in the APROL Web Portal used in B&R APROL <4.4-00P5 may allow an unauthenticated network-based attacker to force the web server to request arbitrary URLs. |
| A Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability in the APROL Web Portal used in B&R APROL <4.4-00P5 may allow an authenticated network-based attacker to force the web server to request arbitrary URLs. |
| The urllib.parse.urlsplit() and urlparse() functions improperly validated bracketed hosts (`[]`), allowing hosts that weren't IPv6 or IPvFuture. This behavior was not conformant to RFC 3986 and potentially enabled SSRF if a URL is processed by more than one URL parser. |
| A vulnerability classified as critical was found in IPC Unigy Management System 04.03.00.08.0027. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component HTTP Request Handler. The manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. |
| The Broken Link Checker | Finder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Blind Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.5.0 via the 'moblc_check_link' function. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Author-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| The Photo Gallery Slideshow & Masonry Tiled Gallery plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.15 via the rjg_get_youtube_info_justified_gallery_callback function. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Subscriber-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to retrieve limited information from internal services. |
| The Starter Templates — Elementor, WordPress & Beaver Builder Templates plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.1.6 via the ai_api_request(). This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with contributor-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application and can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the /Upgrade/FixConfig route in Open Library Foundation VuFind 2.0 through 9.1 before 9.1.1 allows a remote attacker to overwrite local configuration files to gain access to the administrator panel and achieve Remote Code Execution. A mitigating factor is that it requires the allow_url_include PHP runtime setting to be on, which is off in default installations. It also requires the /Upgrade route to be exposed, which is exposed by default after installing VuFind, and is recommended to be disabled by setting autoConfigure to false in config.ini. |
| A server-side request forgery (SSRF) was discovered in the Akana API Platform in versions prior to and including 2022.1.3. Reported by Jakob Antonsson. |
| Judge0 is an open-source online code execution system. The default configuration of Judge0 leaves the service vulnerable to a sandbox escape via Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF). This allows an attacker with sufficient access to the Judge0 API to obtain unsandboxed code execution as root on the target machine. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.13.1.
|
| OneNav v0.9.35-20240318 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the component /index.php?c=api&method=get_link_info. |
| Apache XML Security for C++ through 2.0.4 implements the XML Signature Syntax and Processing (XMLDsig) specification without protection against an SSRF payload in a KeyInfo element. NOTE: the project disputes this CVE Record on the grounds that any vulnerabilities are the result of a failure to configure XML Security for C++ securely. Even when avoiding this particular issue, any use of this library would need considerable additional code and a deep understanding of the standards and protocols involved to arrive at a secure implementation for any particular use case. We recommend against continued direct use of this library. |
| The W3C XML Signature Syntax and Processing (XMLDsig) specification, starting with 1.0, was originally published with a "RetrievalMethod is a URI ... that may be used to obtain key and/or certificate information" statement and no accompanying information about SSRF risks, and this may have contributed to vulnerable implementations such as those discussed in CVE-2023-36661 and CVE-2024-21893. NOTE: this was mitigated in 1.1 and 2.0 via a directly referenced Best Practices document that calls on implementers to be wary of SSRF. |
