VulnerabilityPublished 27 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-53018: LycheeOrg Lychee · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects LycheeOrg LycheeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.0 Low : upgrade to 6.6.13 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.0Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 6.6.13

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
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 27 Jun 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

Upgrade lycheeorg/Lychee to 6.6.13.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHublycheeorg/Lychee`pkg:github/lycheeorg/Lychee`Other threats	Affected <6.6.13	Fixed in 6.6.13

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade Lychee installations to version 6.6.13 or later, where the SSRF vulnerability is patched. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, organizations should implement network-level controls to restrict the application server's outbound HTTP requests, limiting them to only trusted external endpoints. Application-level mitigations include implementing strict URL validation and allow-listing to prevent requests to internal IP ranges (e.g., 127.0.0.1, 10.0.0.0/8, 192.168.0.0/16) and cloud metadata IP addresses (e.g., 169.254.169.254). Additionally, applying timeouts and size limits on HTTP requests can reduce the risk of resource exhaustion. Monitoring and logging all outbound requests from the Lychee server can help detect anomalous or suspicious activity indicative of exploitation attempts. Employing Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with SSRF detection rules can provide an additional layer of defense. Finally, educating users and administrators about the risks of SSRF and enforcing the principle of least privilege for accounts interacting with Lychee can reduce the attack surface.

Description

Lychee is a free, open-source photo-management tool. Prior to version 6.6.13, a critical Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the `/api/v2/Photo::fromUrl` endpoint. This flaw lets an attacker instruct the application’s backend to make HTTP requests to any URL they choose. Consequently, internal network resources—such as localhost services or cloud-provider metadata endpoints—become reachable. The endpoint takes a URL from the user and calls it server-side via fopen() without any safeguards. There is no IP address validation, nor are there any allow-list, timeout, or size restrictions. Because of this, attackers can point the application at internal targets. Using this flaw, an attacker can perform internal port scans or retrieve sensitive cloud metadata. Version 6.6.13 contains a patch for the issue.

Impact

For European organizations using Lychee versions prior to 6.6.13, this SSRF vulnerability poses a risk primarily to internal network confidentiality. Attackers who can submit URLs to the vulnerable endpoint may leverage it to access internal services that are otherwise protected by network segmentation or firewalls. This includes sensitive internal APIs, databases, or cloud metadata services that could disclose credentials or configuration details. While the direct impact on data integrity or availability is minimal, the information gained through SSRF can facilitate lateral movement or privilege escalation within the network. Organizations operating in cloud environments (e.g., AWS, Azure, GCP) are particularly at risk of metadata exposure, which can lead to credential theft and broader compromise. The requirement for low privileges and user interaction means that attackers might exploit this vulnerability through social engineering or by compromising low-privilege accounts. Given Lychee's use case in managing photo libraries, organizations in media, education, or public sectors using this tool could be targeted to gain footholds or gather intelligence. Although no active exploitation is reported, the vulnerability should be treated seriously due to its potential to bypass network boundaries and access sensitive internal resources.

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 27 Jun 2025, 13:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats