CVE-2026-55372

HIGHPre-NVD 7.27.2
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 7.2 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-07-13. The CNA's CVSS baseline 7.2; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: the CNA's CVSS, GitHub Security Advisory

Also known asGHSA-4chg-4752-w88r (GitHub Security Advisories)

7.2EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: —CVSS: 7.2Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

NukeViet: Pre-authentication SSRF via X-Forwarded-Host

Summary

An unauthenticated attacker can coerce the server into issuing HTTP requests to an attacker-chosen host by spoofing the X Forwarded-Host (and X-Forwarded-Proto) request headers. The forwarded host is used, without validation, to build the URL that server_info_update() fetches with cURL, resulting in a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) that requires no authentication.

Affected component

  • File: includes/ini.php — function server_info_update() (cURL sink)
  • File: vendor/vinades/nukeviet/Core/Server.php — standardizeHost() and the forwarded-header handling in the constructor (source of the tainted host)
  • Trigger: POST request containing the field __serverInfoUpdate=1, handled early in includes/ini.php before any authentication.

Details

NukeViet\Core\Server derives original_host / original_protocol from the X-Forwarded-Host / X-Forwarded-Proto headers and exposes them via getOriginalHost() / getOriginalProtocol(). These values are attacker-controlled and were not validated against the site's configured domains (my_domains).

In server_info_update() the tainted host and scheme are concatenated directly into a cURL URL:

$proto = $nv_Server->getOriginalProtocol();   // from X-Forwarded-Proto
$host  = $nv_Server->getOriginalHost();        // from X-Forwarded-Host
$ch = curl_init($proto . '://' . $host . NV_BASE_SITEURL . 'index.php?response_headers_detect=1');
curl_exec($ch);

Two factors made this reliably reachable:

  • The __serverInfoUpdate handler runs very early in includes/ini.php, before authentication, so the sink is reachable pre-auth.
  • The host sanitiser standardizeHost() stripped a trailing port only with the regex (\:[0-9]+)$, which is bypassed by appending a slash (e.g. 127.0.0.1:8081/): the string no longer ends in :digits, so the port survives and an arbitrary host:port reaches the cURL call.

Proof of Concept

POST /index.php HTTP/1.1
Host: 
X-Forwarded-Proto: http
X-Forwarded-Host: :/
Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Content-Length: 20

__serverInfoUpdate=1

The server then issues a request to the attacker-supplied host, confirmed via an out-of-band interaction (DNS + HTTP) on a collaborator endpoint.

Impact

The SSRF is blind, HEAD-only, and uses a fixed request path (…/index.php?response_headers_detect=1):

  • The fetched response is stored server-side in the config_ini cache and is not reflected to the attacker, so internal data cannot be exfiltrated directly.
  • Because the path is fixed and not attacker-controlled, cloud metadata endpoints (e.g. 169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/...) cannot be reached, and gopher:// / dict:// request smuggling cannot inject arbitrary payloads.

What an attacker can do: unauthenticated internal host/port discovery (connection success/timing, with the port reachable through the regex bypass), and poisoning of the cached server_headers (the SSRF target's response headers are stored and applied to the site).

Severity

Rated High rather than Critical, because the blind + fixed-path + HEAD design of the sink prevents data exfiltration, cloud credential theft, and internal RCE.

  • CVSS v3.1 Base Score: 7.2 (High)
  • Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

Weakness

  • Primary: CWE-918: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
  • Contributing: CWE-20 (Improper Input Validation), CWE-644 (Improper Neutralization of HTTP Headers used by downstream components / trusting X-Forwarded-*).

Remediation

Fixed by validating and normalising the forwarded values at the source and gating the request before the sink:

  • standardizeHost() now extracts the host with parse_url() (defeats the :port/ bypass) and lower-cases it.
  • X-Forwarded-Proto is restricted to a {http, https} allow-list and falls back to the real server protocol otherwise.
  • X-Forwarded-Port is validated as numeric and within range.
  • The incoming host is checked against my_domains before includes/ini.php is reached; non-matching hosts are rejected/redirected, and server_info_update() additionally re-validates its target host against my_domains (defense in depth).

Workaround

Configure the reverse proxy / web server to strip or override client-supplied X-Forwarded-Host, X-Forwarded-Proto, and X-Forwarded-Port headers, and ensure my_domains is configured with the site's canonical domain(s).

CVSS v3
7.2
EG Score
7.2HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
32
EG Risk 32/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity72% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.2 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
—
EPSS %ILE
—
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.2): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.2 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.2 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
Unknown (no EPSS on record)Unknown, not low: FIRST has published no EPSS probability for this CVE.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

July 13, 2026

Last Modified

July 13, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-55372(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
composernukeviet/nukeviet @ 4.6.00 (fixes < 4.6.00)—ghsa

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Packagist(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
nukeviet/nukeviet4.0.24, 4.4.01
  • every version up to 4.6.00: fixed in 4.6.00
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 2× in last 7d / 8× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-01 07:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-4chg-4752-w88r · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.2
  2. 2026-11-01 07:43 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-25 14:19 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-10-18 03:30 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-12 15:55 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 19:39 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 16:54 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 14:17 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-01 14:12 UTCEG score recompute
  10. 2026-07-30 17:18 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-07-26 11:52 UTCEG score recompute
  12. 2026-07-23 03:20 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-07-13 18:08 UTCEG score recompute

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-55372?
CVE-2026-55372 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on July 13, 2026. NukeViet: Pre-authentication SSRF via X-Forwarded-Host Summary An unauthenticated attacker can coerce the server into issuing HTTP requests to an attacker-chosen host by spoofing the X Forwarded-Host (and X-Forwarded-Proto) request headers. The forwarded host is used, without validation, to build…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-55372 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-55372 was published on July 13, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of July 13, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-55372?
CVE-2026-55372 has a CVSS base score of 7.2 (the CNA's own assessment, by github_m; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-55372?
A fix for CVE-2026-55372 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-55372 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-55372

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-55372?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.