CVE Intelligence
Medium SSRF exploit reference

CVE-2026-45709 — Mailpit has an incomplete fix for GHSA-6jxm: HTML check still permits SSRF to private/loopback/IMDS via missing IP-filter dialer

Mailpit is an email testing tool and API for developers. The fix for GHSA-6jxm-fv7w-rw5j (CVE-2026-23845, "Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via HTML Check API"), shipped in mailpit `v1.28.3`, hardened `internal/htmlcheck/css.go::downloadCSSToBytes` with a 5MB size cap, a `text/css` content-type check, login-info stripping in `isValidURL`, and an opt-in `--block-remote-css-and-fonts` config flag — but did not add the IP-filtering dialer that the same codebase already uses on the two sister SSRF endpoints (the proxy handler and link-check). Prior to version 1.30.0, `internal/htmlcheck/css.go::newSafeHTTPClient` is mis-named — it builds an `http.Client` whose `Transport.DialContext` calls `net.Dialer.DialContext` directly with no IP allowlisting. As a result, the SSRF originally reported by Bao Anh Phan still permits the server to dial loopback, private, link-local, and any other reserved/multicast range, provided the target replies with `HTTP/200` and a content-type beginning with `text/css`. With redirect-following (`CheckRedirect` allows redirects to any `isValidURL` URL with no IP filter), an attacker-controlled public site can redirect mailpit's request into the private network without ever appearing in the email's HTML. In the default mailpit deploy (no UI auth, no SMTP auth, port 1025/8025 exposed), this is an unauthenticated, network-reachable SSRF triggered by sending an HTML email and then issuing one HTTP `GET` to `/api/v1/message/{id}/html-check`. Version 1.30.0 contains an updated fix.

Published Jul 20, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: GitHub_M

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+3
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • Automatable exploitation (SSVC)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.32%
ahead of 23% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Axllent
Mailpit
CVSS base
5.8
Medium · 2 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
Yes
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Axllent Mailpit).
  2. The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
  3. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  4. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (ssrf), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Axllent Mailpit ≥ 1.28.3 and < 1.30.0 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database
Axllent Mailpit version >= 1.28.3, < 1.30.0 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
Low
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.8 CVSS 3.1 Medium 3.9 1.4 security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.8 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Other CVEs with this weakness →

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Prioritize edge telemetry for the network-reachable component (proxy, WAF, IDS/IPS).
  • Monitor outbound requests from the server to internal IPs and cloud metadata endpoints.
web/proxy/WAF logsnetwork IDS/IPSegress traffic

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · axllent/mailpit
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 5.8
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jul 20, 2026 · GitHub_M

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

2 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Axllent
every CVE for this vendor
SSRF
same class
CWE-918
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-84697 Mailpit SSRF Deny List Bypass via Azure Metadata and IPv6 Prefix Sep 1, 2026
  • CVE-2026-67447 Mailpit: SMTP DATA line reader buffers over-limit input before size enforcement Aug 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-67448 Mailpit: WebSocket origin check bypass via percent-encoded path (regression of CVE-2026-22689) Aug 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-67445 Mailpit: SMTP command parser buffers unbounded command lines before syntax rejection Aug 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-67446 Mailpit: Thumbnail generation decodes unbounded image dimensions before scaling Aug 20, 2026
  • CVE-2026-48824 Mailpit: Sibling-endpoint memory-exhaustion DoS via unbounded JSON body on /api/v1/messages, /api/v1/tags, and /api/v1/message/{id}/release (incomplete fix of GHSA-fpxj-m5q8-fphw) Jul 20, 2026

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-45709 is "Mailpit has an incomplete fix for GHSA-6jxm: HTML check still permits SSRF to private/loopback/IMDS via missing IP-filter dialer", rated Medium. It affects Mailpit (Axllent); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.8 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.32% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.