VulnerabilityPublished 25 Feb 2026Updated 27 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-27732: WWBN AVideo · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects WWBN AVideoSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.6 High : upgrade to 22.0 soon.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 19:04 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

8.6High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 19% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 22.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
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: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable 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 25 Feb 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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 AVideo and wwbn/AVideo to 22.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
WWBNAVideo	Affected <22.0	Fixed in 22.0
GitHubwwbn/AVideo`pkg:github/wwbn/AVideo`Other threats	Affected <22.0	Fixed in 22.0

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade all AVideo instances to version 22.0 or later, where the vulnerability is patched.
If immediate upgrade is not feasible, restrict access to the aVideoEncoder.json.php API endpoint to trusted users only and monitor usage closely.
Implement network segmentation and firewall rules to limit the server's ability to make outbound requests to sensitive internal services or metadata endpoints.
Employ web application firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block suspicious SSRF patterns targeting the downloadURL parameter.
Conduct regular audits of user accounts and privileges to reduce the risk of compromised credentials being used for exploitation.
Review and harden internal services to require strong authentication and minimize sensitive data exposure.
Monitor logs for unusual server-side request activity originating from the AVideo server.
Educate administrators about SSRF risks and ensure secure coding practices for any custom integrations with AVideo.

Description

### Vulnerability Type Authenticated Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) ### Affected Product/Versions AVideo versions prior to 22 (tested on AVideo 21.x). ### Root Cause Summary The `aVideoEncoder.json.php` API endpoint accepts a `downloadURL` parameter and fetches the referenced resource server-side without proper validation or an allow-list. This allows authenticated users to trigger server-side requests to arbitrary URLs (including internal network endpoints). ### Impact Summary An authenticated attacker can leverage SSRF to interact with internal services and retrieve sensitive data (e.g., internal APIs, metadata services), potentially leading to further compromise depending on the deployment environment. ### Resolution/Fix This issue has been fixed in AVideo version 22. Users should upgrade to version 22.0 as soon as possible. ### Credits/Acknowledgement Thanks to Arkadiusz Marta for responsibly reporting this issue. - GitHub Profile: https://github.com/arkmarta/

Impact

The SSRF vulnerability allows authenticated attackers to make arbitrary server-side HTTP requests, potentially accessing sensitive internal services that are not exposed externally. This can lead to unauthorized disclosure of confidential information such as internal APIs, metadata services, or other protected resources. In some environments, SSRF can be chained with other vulnerabilities to escalate privileges or execute remote code, increasing the risk of full system compromise. Organizations running affected versions of AVideo may face data breaches, service disruptions, or lateral movement within their networks. Since the flaw requires only authentication, any compromised or malicious user account can be leveraged to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is particularly severe in cloud or containerized deployments where metadata services contain critical credentials or configuration data. Overall, this vulnerability poses a significant risk to confidentiality and integrity of organizational assets.

Summary

WWBN AVideo, an open-source video platform, contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability identified as CVE-2026-27732, classified under CWE-918. The flaw resides in the aVideoEncoder.json.php API endpoint, which accepts a downloadURL parameter that is used to fetch external resources server-side. Prior to version 22.0, this parameter is not properly validated or restricted via an allow-list, allowing authenticated users to supply arbitrary URLs. This enables attackers to coerce the server into making HTTP requests to internal or external systems on their behalf. Such SSRF attacks can be leveraged to access internal services that are otherwise inaccessible externally, including internal APIs, metadata services, or administrative interfaces. Depending on the deployment environment, this can lead to sensitive data disclosure or serve as a pivot point for further network compromise. The vulnerability requires authentication but no additional privileges or user interaction, making exploitation relatively straightforward for legitimate users. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 8.6 (high severity), reflecting the significant confidentiality and integrity impact combined with ease of exploitation. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild. The vendor has addressed the issue in AVideo version 22.0 by implementing proper validation and allow-listing of URLs in the downloadURL parameter.

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (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.
Implementation · Operation
If there is a known list of applications, IP, hostname, and/or domains to which the product is allowed to communicate, then use allowlists to ensure that outgoing requests are restricted to these known entities. The allowlists could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.
Implementation · Operation
If the product is expected to be able to connect to arbitrary IP addresses or domains, consider using a denylist that includes private network addresses, internal domain names, etc. The denylist could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
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 4 Mar 2026, 18:50 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats