VulnerabilityPublished 10 Jul 2025Updated 4 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-43394: Apache HTTP Server · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects Apache HTTP ServerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 1.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 69% 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:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
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 10 Jul 2025
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Apache Software Foundation Apache HTTP Server	Affected =2.4.0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately audit their Apache HTTP Server deployments on Windows to identify affected versions (2.4.0 through 2.4.63). Since no official patches are listed yet, organizations should implement the following mitigations: (1) Restrict SMB outbound connections from Apache servers to only trusted hosts using firewall rules or network segmentation to prevent unauthorized SMB communication. (2) Review and sanitize all mod_rewrite rules and Apache expressions to ensure they do not accept unvalidated user input that could reference UNC paths. (3) Disable or limit the use of UNC paths in server configurations where possible. (4) Monitor network traffic for unusual SMB connection attempts originating from Apache servers. (5) Employ network intrusion detection systems (NIDS) with signatures for SSRF and SMB relay attempts. (6) Plan for timely patching once Apache releases an official fix. (7) Educate system administrators about the risks of SSRF via UNC paths and the importance of secure configuration. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on network-level controls and configuration hygiene specific to this vulnerability.

Description

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in Apache HTTP Server on Windows allows to potentially leak NTLM hashes to a malicious server via mod_rewrite or apache expressions that pass unvalidated request input. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server: from 2.4.0 through 2.4.63. Note: The Apache HTTP Server Project will be setting a higher bar for accepting vulnerability reports regarding SSRF via UNC paths. The server offers limited protection against administrators directing the server to open UNC paths. Windows servers should limit the hosts they will connect over via SMB based on the nature of NTLM authentication.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a substantial risk to confidentiality, particularly for those running Apache HTTP Server on Windows environments. The leakage of NTLM hashes can lead to credential compromise, enabling attackers to perform lateral movement within corporate networks or escalate privileges. Critical sectors such as finance, government, healthcare, and energy, which often rely on Windows-based infrastructure and Apache HTTP Server, could face targeted attacks exploiting this vulnerability. The exposure of NTLM hashes also increases the risk of man-in-the-middle or relay attacks, potentially undermining trust in internal authentication mechanisms. Given the widespread use of Apache HTTP Server in Europe and the common deployment of Windows servers in enterprise environments, the vulnerability could facilitate espionage, data breaches, and disruption of services. The lack of known exploits currently provides a window for proactive mitigation, but the ease of exploitation and high confidentiality impact necessitate urgent attention.

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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Nov 2025, 20:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats