CVE-2026-54450 — ToolHive: SSRF guard misses IPv6 NAT64 ranges (64:ff9b::/96, 64:ff9b:1::/48), allowing metadata/internal access behind a NAT64 gateway
ToolHive is a utility designed to simplify the deployment and management of Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Prior to 0.29.1, networking.IsPrivateIP in pkg/networking/utilities.go omits the IPv6 NAT64 prefixes 64:ff9b::/96 and 64:ff9b:1::/48, so NAT64 addresses embedding private, loopback, or link-local IPv4 targets are classified as public and allowed. The most direct attacker-controlled path begins when an external OAuth client supplies a client_id URL that CIMDStorageDecorator.GetClient routes through FetchClientMetadataDocument in pkg/oauthproto/cimd/fetch.go; protectedDialerControl in pkg/networking/http_client.go and validateHost in pkg/skills/gitresolver/reference.go share the defective classification but use operator-controlled or user-controlled destinations. On a ToolHive host behind a NAT64/DNS64 gateway, the gateway translates an allowed address such as 64:ff9b:1::a9fe:a9fe to 169.254.169.254, permitting blind probing of internal TCP or TLS reachability. The attacker-controlled CIMD path requires HTTPS, verifies certificates, and does not reflect response bodies, so the established impact is an internal reachability oracle rather than metadata credential exfiltration; the webhook client is not affected because it does not use this IP guard. This issue is fixed in version 0.29.1.
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+4
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.
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.
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.
- Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Stacklok Toolhive).
- The attack is network-based and needs no privileges: restrict exposure (ACLs, VPN, WAF) until patched.
- No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
- 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.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
Every base score collected
Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.
| Score | Version | Severity | Expl. | Impact | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.9 | CVSS 4.0 | Low | — | — | security-advisories@github.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database |
| 2.9 | CVSS 4.0 | Low | — | — | GitHub_M via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP |
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X (score shown at the top: security-advisories@github.com) Weakness MITRE
Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.
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.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · stacklok/toolhive
- SSVC assessment updated
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 2.9
- Source status changed · → Deferred
- Record created in this database
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026
References
3 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- High CVE-2026-58197 ToolHive: containerized MCP servers can reach host services via host.docker.internal, enabling lateral movement 27d
- Medium CVE-2026-58196 ToolHive: SSRF in remote MCP server authentication discovery (host-side, bypasses container isolation) Sep 15, 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-2026-54450 is "ToolHive: SSRF guard misses IPv6 NAT64 ranges (64:ff9b::/96, 64:ff9b:1::/48), allowing metadata/internal access behind a NAT64 gateway", rated Low. It affects Toolhive (Stacklok); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 2.9 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.33% 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.