VulnerabilityPublished 7 Apr 2026Updated 9 Apr 2026

CVE-2026-35486: oobabooga text-generation-webui · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects oobabooga text-generation-webuiSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.5 High : upgrade to 4.3 soon.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.5High

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 34% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 4.3

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 7 Apr 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 30 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 text-generation-webui and oobabooga/text-generation-webui to 4.3.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
oobaboogatext-generation-webui	Affected <4.3	Fixed in 4.3
GitHuboobabooga/text-generation-webui`pkg:github/oobabooga/text-generation-webui`Other threats	Affected <4.3	Fixed in 4.3

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade the oobabooga text-generation-webui to version 4.3 or later, where this SSRF vulnerability has been fixed. No other official remediation or temporary fixes are documented. Patch status is not explicitly confirmed beyond the fix in version 4.3, so users should verify the upgrade to this or a later version.

Description

text-generation-webui is an open-source web interface for running Large Language Models. Prior to 4.3, he superbooga and superboogav2 RAG extensions fetch user-supplied URLs via requests.get() with zero validation — no scheme check, no IP filtering, no hostname allowlist. An attacker can access cloud metadata endpoints, steal IAM credentials, and probe internal services. The fetched content is exfiltrated through the RAG pipeline. This vulnerability is fixed in 4.3.

Impact

An attacker can exploit this SSRF vulnerability to access sensitive internal resources, including cloud metadata endpoints, which may lead to the theft of IAM credentials. The attacker can also probe internal services that are otherwise inaccessible externally. The vulnerability does not impact integrity or availability but has a high impact on confidentiality.

Summary

The oobabooga text-generation-webui versions before 4.3 contain an SSRF vulnerability (CWE-918) in the superbooga and superboogav2 RAG extensions. These extensions use requests.get() to fetch URLs supplied by users without any validation such as scheme checks, IP filtering, or hostname allowlisting. This flaw allows attackers to make the server request internal or protected resources, including cloud metadata endpoints, potentially leading to credential theft and internal service probing. The vulnerability is addressed in version 4.3 of the software.

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

github.com/oobabooga/text-generation-webui/security/advisories/GHSA-jvrj-w5hq-6cp2 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 15 Apr 2026, 12:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats