VulnerabilityPublished 20 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-33130: louislam uptime-kuma · PHP Remote File Inclusion

Affects louislam uptime-kumaSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 2.2.1 when convenient.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 20:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 28% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.2.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 20 Mar 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 31 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 louislam uptime-kuma to 2.2.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
louislamuptime-kuma	Affected >=1.23.0 <2.2.1	Fixed in 2.2.1
GitHublouislam/uptime-kuma`pkg:github/louislam/uptime-kuma`Other threats	Affected =1.23.0 <=2.2.0	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade Uptime Kuma to version 2.2.1 or later, where the vulnerability is fully patched.
Review and restrict user privileges to minimize the risk of attackers having the required privileges to exploit this vulnerability.
Implement strict input validation and sanitization on any user-controllable inputs that influence template rendering or file inclusion paths.
Monitor logs for suspicious file access patterns, especially attempts to include absolute paths or access sensitive files like /etc/passwd.
Employ network segmentation and firewall rules to limit access to Uptime Kuma instances only to trusted users and systems.
Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focusing on template injection and file inclusion vulnerabilities.
If upgrading immediately is not possible, consider temporarily disabling or restricting features that allow template customization or file inclusion.
Educate developers and administrators about secure template engine usage and the risks of improper file inclusion.

Description

CVE-2026-33130 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Uptime Kuma versions 1.23.0 through 2.2.0 that allows attackers with limited privileges to read arbitrary files on the server. The issue arises from improper control of filename inclusion in the LiquidJS template engine, specifically in the require.resolve() fallback mechanism, which lacks containment checks for unquoted absolute paths. This flaw enables remote file inclusion (RFI) attacks, potentially exposing sensitive server files such as /etc/passwd. The vulnerability does not require user interaction but does require some level of privileges (PR:L). It was fixed in version 2.

Impact

The primary impact of this vulnerability is unauthorized disclosure of sensitive server files, which can include configuration files, credentials, or other critical data. This exposure can facilitate further attacks such as privilege escalation, lateral movement, or targeted exploitation of other vulnerabilities. Since Uptime Kuma is often deployed in internal monitoring environments, attackers gaining access to sensitive files could disrupt monitoring operations or gain insights into the network infrastructure. The vulnerability requires some level of privileges (PR:L), so attackers must have limited access already, but no user interaction is needed. The confidentiality impact is high, while integrity and availability remain unaffected. Organizations using affected versions risk data leakage and potential compromise of internal systems if the vulnerability is exploited. Although no exploits are currently known in the wild, the ease of exploitation via network access and the critical nature of the data potentially exposed make this a significant risk.

CWE-98Improper Control of Filename for Include/Require Statement in PHP Program (Remote File Include) (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighOWASP Top 10 A05:2025: Injection (opens in a new tab)
The PHP application receives input from an upstream component, but it does not restrict or incorrectly restricts the input before its usage in "require," "include," or similar functions.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Enforcement by Conversion
When the set of acceptable objects, such as filenames or URLs, is limited or known, create a mapping from a set of fixed input values (such as numeric IDs) to the actual filenames or URLs, and reject all other inputs.
Architecture and Design
For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Vulnerable Dependency Management (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
SQL Injection Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Injection Prevention in Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V12.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V12.3.6 (opens in a new tab)
V14.2.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
PHP Remote File Inclusion (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1336Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product uses a template engine to insert or process externally-influenced input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements or syntax that can be interpreted as template expressions or other code directives when processed by the engine.
Architecture and Design
Choose a template engine that offers a sandbox or restricted mode, or at least limits the power of any available expressions, function calls, or commands.
Implementation
Use the template engine's sandbox or restricted mode, if available.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
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)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.8 (opens in a new tab)
V5.2.5 (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 Mar 2026, 19:32 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-98, CWE-1336

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats