| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in multiple Selea Targa IP OCR-ANPR camera models, including iZero, Targa 512, Targa 504, Targa Semplice, Targa 704 TKM, Targa 805, Targa 710 INOX, Targa 750, and Targa 704 ILB. The application fails to validate user-supplied input in JSON POST parameters such as ipnotify_address and url, which are used by internal mechanisms to perform image fetch and DNS lookups. This allows remote unauthenticated attackers to induce the system to make arbitrary HTTP requests to internal or external systems, potentially bypassing firewall policies or conducting internal service enumeration. Exploitation evidence was observed by the Shadowserver Foundation on 2025-01-25 UTC. |
| There is an SSRF vulnerability in the Fluid Topics platform that affects versions prior to 4.3, where the server can be forced to make arbitrary requests to internal and external resources by an authenticated user. |
| A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability has been identified in the Web Services feature of newer
Lexmark devices. |
| Anheng Mingyu Operation and Maintenance Audit and Risk Control System up to 2023-08-10 contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the xmlrpc.sock handler. The product accepts specially crafted XML-RPC requests that can be used to instruct the server to connect to internal unix socket RPC endpoints and perform privileged XML-RPC methods. An attacker able to send such requests can invoke administrative RPC methods via the unix socket interface to create arbitrary user accounts on the system, resulting in account creation and potential takeover of the bastion host. VulnCheck has observed this vulnerability being exploited in the wild as of 2025-10-30 at 00:30:17.837319 UTC. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| A flaw was found in` JwtValidator.resolvePublicKey` in JBoss EAP, where the validator checks jku and sends a HTTP request. During this process, no whitelisting or other filtering behavior is performed on the destination URL address, which may result in a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. |
| Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in SaxEventRecorder by QOS.CH logback version 0.1 to 1.3.14 and 1.4.0 to 1.5.12 on the Java platform, allows an attacker to
forge requests by compromising logback configuration files in XML.
The attacks involves the modification of DOCTYPE declaration in XML configuration files. |
| Server-Side Request Forgery in URL Mapper in Arctic Security's Arctic Hub versions 3.0.1764-5.6.1877 allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to exfiltrate and modify configurations and data. |
| The Your Friendly Drag and Drop Page Builder — Make Builder plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 1.1.10 via the make_builder_ajax_subscribe() 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 query and modify information from internal services. |
| The WPGet API – Connect to any external REST API plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 2.2.10. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Administrator-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application which can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| The Stream plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 4.0.2 due to insufficient validation on the webhook feature. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with administrator-level access and above, to make web requests to arbitrary locations originating from the web application which can be used to query and modify information from internal services. |
| Versions of the package github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8/pkg/gotenberg before 8.1.0; versions of the package github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8/pkg/modules/chromium before 8.1.0; versions of the package github.com/gotenberg/gotenberg/v8/pkg/modules/webhook before 8.1.0 are vulnerable to Server-side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the /convert/html endpoint when a request is made to a file via localhost, such as <iframe src="\\localhost/etc/passwd">. By exploiting this vulnerability, an attacker can achieve local file inclusion, allowing of sensitive files read on the host system.
Workaround
An alternative is using either or both --chromium-deny-list and --chromium-allow-list flags. |
| XML External Entity (XXE) vulnerability in Terminalfour 8.0.0001 through 8.3.18 and XML JDBC versions up to 1.0.4 allows authenticated users to submit malicious XML via unspecified features which could lead to various actions such as accessing the underlying server, remote code execution (RCE), or performing Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) attacks. |
| Applications that use UriComponentsBuilder to parse an externally provided URL (e.g. through a query parameter) AND perform validation checks on the host of the parsed URL may be vulnerable to a open redirect https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/601.html attack or to a SSRF attack if the URL is used after passing validation checks.
This is the same as CVE-2024-22259 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22259 and CVE-2024-22243 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22243 , but with different input. |
| 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. |
| TwoNav 2.1.13 contains an SSRF vulnerability via the url paramater to index.php?c=api&method=read_data&type=connectivity_test (which reaches /system/api.php). |
| Users with low privileges can perform certain AJAX actions. In this vulnerability instance, improper access to ajax?action=plugin:focus:checkIframeAvailability leads to a Server-Side Request Forgery by analyzing the error messages returned from the back-end. Allowing an attacker to perform a port scan in the back-end. At the time of publication of the CVE no patch is available.
|
| 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. |
