CVE Intelligence
High SSRF

CVE-2026-80350 — OneUptime before 12.0.7 Server-Side Request Forgery via IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Webhook URL

OneUptime's webhook target check rejects private and loopback addresses given in IPv4 form and a small set of IPv6 forms, but has no case for the IPv4-mapped IPv6 range. The webhook delivery path calls SSRFProtection.validateWebhookTargetIsSafe, and the host-literal screening inside Common/Server/Utils/SSRFProtection.ts, performed by isBlockedHostnameLiteral, rejects private and loopback IPv4 ranges and tests an IPv6 value against the unspecified address, the loopback, the link-local prefix and the unique-local prefixes. A value such as [::ffff:127.0.0.1] matches none of them. The value is also recognised as an address literal rather than a name, so the path that re-checks addresses obtained from resolution is not taken. The HTTP client treats the mapped form as the embedded IPv4 address and connects to it, so an authenticated project member who can configure a webhook can direct the server at loopback services, private network ranges and link-local metadata endpoints, and the response is recorded where the webhook result can be read. Version 12.0.7 adds handling for the mapped range.

Published Aug 26, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: VulnCheck

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
  • Technical severity (high)+6
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

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
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
OneUptime
Oneuptime
CVSS base
7.1
High · 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
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
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 (OneUptime Oneuptime).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. 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
OneUptime Oneuptime < 12.0.7 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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
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
7.1 CVSS 4.0 High — — disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.1 CVSS 4.0 High — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
7.1 CVSS 3.1 High 2.8 4.2 disclosure@vulncheck.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.1 CVSS 3.1 High — — VulnCheck via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N (score shown at the top: disclosure@vulncheck.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 · oneuptime/oneuptime
    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 · 7.1
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Aug 26, 2026 · VulnCheck

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

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

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

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

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-45102 OneUptime: RCE due to Node.js' vm module escape via error objects and infinite recursion May 27, 2026
  • CVE-2026-35053 OneUptime: Unauthenticated Workflow Execution via ManualAPI Apr 2, 2026
  • CVE-2026-34840 OneUptime SSO: Multi-Assertion Identity Injection via Decoupled Signature Verification Apr 2, 2026
  • CVE-2026-34759 OneUptime: Unauthenticated notification API endpoints - financial abuse via phone number purchase, service disruption, and SMTP credential exposure Apr 2, 2026
  • CVE-2026-34758 OneUptime: Missing Authentication on Notification Endpoints Apr 2, 2026
  • CVE-2026-33396 OneUptime has sandbox escape in Synthetic Monitor Playwright runtime allows project members to execute arbitrary commands on Probe Mar 26, 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 FIRST EPSS score.
  • 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-2026-80350 is "OneUptime before 12.0.7 Server-Side Request Forgery via IPv4-Mapped IPv6 Webhook URL", rated High. It affects Oneuptime (OneUptime); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.1 describes technical severity. 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.