CVE-2025-56520VulnerabilityPublished 30 Sep 2025Updated 1 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-56520: n/a

Source CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-29720

Not known to be exploited · public detection template (Nuclei) · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 52% 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:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
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: 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: 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 30 Sep 2025
Detectable: evidence found.
nuclei template: Dify v1.6.0 - Server-Side Request Forgery
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 2026-10-26.

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 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

To mitigate CVE-2025-56520, organizations should first assess whether they are running Dify version 1.6.0 and if the RemoteFileUploadApi component is exposed to untrusted networks. Network-level controls should be implemented to restrict outbound HTTP requests from the affected server, limiting them to only necessary destinations. Employing strict egress filtering and network segmentation can prevent SSRF from reaching sensitive internal services. Application-level mitigations include validating and sanitizing all user-supplied URLs or inputs that trigger server-side requests, ensuring they cannot be manipulated to access internal resources. Monitoring and logging outbound requests from the application can help detect anomalous behavior indicative of SSRF exploitation attempts. Until an official patch is released, consider disabling or restricting the vulnerable component if feasible. Additionally, conduct regular security assessments and penetration tests focusing on SSRF vectors in your environment.

Description

Dify v1.6.0 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the component controllers.console.remote_files.RemoteFileUploadApi. A different vulnerability than CVE-2025-29720.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-56520 is the potential unauthorized disclosure of sensitive internal information due to SSRF exploitation. This could include access to internal APIs, cloud metadata services, or other protected resources, which may lead to further attacks or data leakage. Although the vulnerability does not directly affect data integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach could have regulatory implications under GDPR if personal or sensitive data is exposed. Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and critical infrastructure, which often use SaaS platforms like Dify for automation or workflow management, may face increased risk. The lack of required authentication or user interaction means attackers can exploit this vulnerability remotely and anonymously, increasing the threat surface. However, the absence of known exploits in the wild and the medium severity score suggest that the immediate risk is moderate but should not be ignored.

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

github.com/langgenius/dify/issues/22532 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Oct 2025, 04:26 UTC

Public exploits and detectiona Nuclei detection template

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats