VulnerabilityPublished 15 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-59155: yuna0x0 hackmd-mcp · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects yuna0x0 hackmd-mcpSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium · fixed in 1.5.0 : update yuna0x0 hackmd-mcp when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:42 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 29% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.5.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: Low
Subsequent system integrity: Low
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, 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: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system 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 Subsequent System.
Subsequent system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Subsequent System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Sep 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

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize upgrading hackmd-mcp installations to version 1.5.0 or later, where the vulnerability is fully addressed by endpoint validation and configurable allowed URLs. If immediate upgrading is not feasible, switching the server to stdio transport mode is a strong mitigation, as it inherently blocks HTTP-based SSRF vectors. Network-level controls should be implemented to restrict outbound traffic from hackmd-mcp servers, limiting connections to only trusted internal and external endpoints. Deploying reverse proxies or web application firewalls (WAFs) to filter and validate the Hackmd-Api-Url HTTP header and any base64-encoded JSON query parameters can prevent malicious redirection attempts. Regularly auditing and monitoring outbound requests from hackmd-mcp servers can help detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Additionally, organizations should review internal network segmentation and access controls to minimize the impact of potential SSRF exploitation. Security teams should also ensure that logging and alerting mechanisms are in place to capture suspicious activity related to hackmd-mcp API calls.

Description

hackmd-mcp is a Model Context Protocol server for integrating HackMD's note-taking platform with AI assistants. From 1.4.0 to before 1.5.0, hackmd-mcp contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability when the server is run in HTTP transport mode. Arbitrary hackmdApiUrl values supplied via the Hackmd-Api-Url HTTP header or a base64-encoded JSON query parameter are accepted without validation, allowing attackers to redirect outbound API requests to internal network services, access internal endpoints, perform network reconnaissance, and bypass network access controls. The stdio transport mode is not affected because it only accepts stdio requests. The issue is fixed in version 1.5.0, which enforces allowed endpoints and supports the ALLOWED_HACKMD_API_URLS environment variable. Users should update to 1.5.0 or later or apply documented mitigations such as switching to stdio mode, restricting outbound network access, or filtering the Hackmd-Api-Url header and related query parameter via a reverse proxy.

Impact

For European organizations using hackmd-mcp versions between 1.4.0 and 1.5.0 in HTTP transport mode, this SSRF vulnerability poses a significant risk to internal network security. Attackers exploiting this flaw can pivot from the exposed server to internal services, potentially accessing sensitive data, internal APIs, or administrative interfaces not intended for external exposure. This can lead to unauthorized information disclosure, internal network mapping, and potentially facilitate further attacks such as lateral movement or privilege escalation within the network. Given that hackmd-mcp integrates with AI assistants and note-taking platforms, confidential organizational information could be at risk if internal endpoints are accessed. The ability to bypass network access controls undermines perimeter defenses, increasing the attack surface. Although the vulnerability does not directly affect availability, the compromise of internal services or data confidentiality can have serious operational and reputational consequences. The absence of required authentication or user interaction lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing risk. European organizations in sectors with high confidentiality requirements, such as finance, healthcare, and government, are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of such internal network exposure.

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 15 Sep 2025, 17:03 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats