CVE-2026-25960VulnerabilityPublished 9 Mar 2026Updated 21 Jul 2026

CVE-2026-25960: vllm · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects vllmSource CVE Database V5

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-24779

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.1 High : upgrade to 0.17.0 soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.1High

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 45% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.17.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Mar 2026
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 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 vllm to 0.17.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
vllm-projectvllm	Affected >=0.15.1 <0.17.0	Fixed in 0.17.0
PyPIvllm`pkg:pypi/vllm`Other threats	Affected =0.17.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

If you cannot patch yet, users should consider restricting or monitoring the use of the load_from_url_async method or applying additional URL validation consistent with the HTTP client parsing behavior to prevent SSRF bypass.

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). The SSRF protection fix for CVE-2026-24779 add in 0.15.1 can be bypassed in the load_from_url_async method due to inconsistent URL parsing behavior between the validation layer and the actual HTTP client. The SSRF fix uses urllib3.util.parse_url() to validate and extract the hostname from user-provided URLs. However, load_from_url_async uses aiohttp for making the actual HTTP requests, and aiohttp internally uses the yarl library for URL parsing. This vulnerability in 0.17.0.

Impact

Successful exploitation of this SSRF vulnerability can allow an attacker with limited privileges to cause the server to make HTTP requests to arbitrary internal or external resources. The CVSS score of 7.1 (high) reflects the potential for high confidentiality impact without integrity or availability impact. This could lead to unauthorized information disclosure or interaction with internal services not otherwise accessible.

Summary

The vulnerability in vllm 0.17.0 involves a bypass of SSRF protections originally introduced in version 0.15.1. The SSRF fix uses urllib3.util.parse_url() to validate and extract hostnames from user-supplied URLs, but the actual HTTP requests in load_from_url_async use aiohttp, which parses URLs differently via the yarl library. This discrepancy leads to inconsistent URL parsing and validation, enabling an attacker to bypass SSRF protections and potentially cause the server to make unauthorized requests to internal or protected 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).
CWE-474Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The code uses a function that has inconsistent implementations across operating systems and versions.
Architecture and Design · Requirements
Do not accept inconsistent behavior from the API specifications when the deviant behavior increase the risk level.
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 22 Jul 2026, 22:31 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918, CWE-474

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats