VulnerabilityPublished 4 Nov 2024Updated 6 Nov 2024

CVE-2024-48052: gradio · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects gradioSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 40% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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 4 Nov 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
PyPIgradio`pkg:pypi/gradio`Other threats	Affected <=4.42.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-48052, organizations should first upgrade Gradio to a version where this vulnerability is patched once available. Until an official patch is released, consider the following specific actions: 1) Implement strict input validation and URL allowlisting on any user-supplied URLs processed by gr.DownloadButton or related functions to restrict requests to trusted domains only. 2) Employ network-level controls such as firewall rules or egress filtering to prevent the Gradio server from making outbound requests to internal or sensitive network segments. 3) Run Gradio services with the least privilege necessary, limiting access to sensitive files and internal resources. 4) Monitor application logs for unusual or unexpected URL requests that could indicate exploitation attempts. 5) If feasible, isolate the Gradio server in a segmented network zone with restricted access to internal resources. 6) Educate developers and administrators about SSRF risks and secure coding practices to prevent similar vulnerabilities. 7) Conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on SSRF and related vulnerabilities in web applications.

Description

In gradio <=4.42.0, the gr.DownloadButton function has a hidden server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. The reason is that within the save_url_to_cache function, there are no restrictions on the URL, which allows access to local target resources. This can lead to the download of local resources and sensitive information.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2024-48052 is the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information residing on internal or local network resources accessible to the vulnerable Gradio server. Attackers exploiting this vulnerability can bypass network segmentation and firewall protections by leveraging the server as a proxy to access internal endpoints, configuration files, or other sensitive data. This can lead to data leakage of confidential information, intellectual property, or credentials stored on internal systems. While the vulnerability does not allow modification of data or denial of service, the confidentiality breach alone can have severe consequences, including regulatory non-compliance, reputational damage, and facilitation of further attacks such as lateral movement within an organization’s network. Organizations deploying Gradio in production environments, especially those exposing the application to untrusted users or the internet, face increased risk. The vulnerability’s exploitation requires some level of access, so insider threats or compromised accounts could be leveraged to exploit it. The absence of known exploits currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat as attackers may develop exploits once the vulnerability is publicly disclosed.

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 28 Feb 2026, 07:36 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats