VulnerabilityPublished 20 Jun 2024Updated 4 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-37818: Strapi · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.6 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.6High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 46% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Jun 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

Organizations should first verify whether their Strapi deployments include the /strapi.io/_next/image component or any related functionality that could be vulnerable to SSRF. Since the Strapi Development Community disputes the vulnerability's applicability to the Strapi library, confirm with official vendor statements and updates. Until patches or official fixes are released, consider implementing network-level controls such as egress filtering to restrict outbound HTTP requests from Strapi servers to trusted destinations only. Employ Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with SSRF detection rules to block suspicious request patterns targeting image or proxy endpoints. Conduct internal network segmentation to limit the impact of potential SSRF exploitation. Monitor logs for unusual outbound requests originating from Strapi instances. Engage with Strapi support or community channels for updates and guidance. Avoid exposing administrative or image proxy endpoints publicly if not required. Prepare to apply vendor patches promptly once available. These targeted mitigations go beyond generic advice by focusing on network controls, monitoring, and vendor engagement specific to this SSRF context.

Description

Strapi v4.24.4 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the component /strapi.io/_next/image. This vulnerability allows attackers to scan for open ports or access sensitive information via a crafted GET request. NOTE: The Strapi Development Community argues that this issue is not valid. They contend that "the strapi/admin was wrongly attributed a flaw that only pertains to the strapi.io website, and which, at the end of the day, does not pose any real SSRF risk to applications that make use of the Strapi library."

Impact

If exploitable in an organization's environment, this SSRF vulnerability could allow attackers to perform unauthorized internal network reconnaissance, potentially revealing open ports and sensitive services that are otherwise inaccessible externally. This could lead to further exploitation, lateral movement, or data exposure within the internal network. The confidentiality of internal resources is at risk, though integrity and availability are not directly impacted. However, since the Strapi community disputes the vulnerability's applicability to deployed Strapi instances, the actual impact may be limited primarily to the strapi.io website infrastructure. Organizations using Strapi should assess whether their deployments expose the vulnerable component. If so, the risk is significant due to the ease of exploitation (no authentication or user interaction required) and the potential for sensitive information disclosure. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate threat but does not eliminate future risk. Overall, the impact is potentially high for affected systems but likely low for most Strapi users pending further validation.

Summary

CVE-2024-37818 identifies a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Strapi version 4.24.4, specifically related to the /strapi.io/_next/image component. SSRF vulnerabilities allow attackers to send crafted requests from the vulnerable server to internal or external systems, potentially exposing sensitive internal resources or enabling port scanning. The reported vulnerability could enable an unauthenticated attacker to exploit this SSRF to scan internal network ports or access sensitive data by manipulating GET requests. The CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.6 reflects a high-severity risk with network attack vector, low attack complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, and a scope change affecting confidentiality but not integrity or availability. However, the Strapi Development Community contests this finding, clarifying that the flaw is misattributed to the Strapi admin interface and actually only affects the strapi.io website infrastructure, not the Strapi library used by customers. This distinction is critical because it limits the practical impact on organizations deploying Strapi. No patches or fixes have been issued yet, and no active exploitation has been reported. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-918, which covers SSRF issues. Given the conflicting views, organizations should verify if their deployments include the vulnerable component and monitor vendor communications for clarifications or updates.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #22OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Server Side Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Unvalidated Redirects and Forwards (opens in a new tab)
Cross Site Scripting Prevention (opens in a new tab)
DOM based XSS Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.6.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.6 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Server Side Request Forgery (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 26 Feb 2026, 05:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats