VulnerabilityPublished 19 Jun 2026Updated 23 Jun 2026

CVE-2026-49359: pontedilana php-weasyprint · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects pontedilana php-weasyprintSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 2.6.0 when convenient.

Data as of 4 Nov 2026, 10:58 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 2.6.0

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 19 Jun 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 4 Nov 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 php-weasyprint and pontedilana/php-weasyprint to 2.6.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
pontedilanaphp-weasyprint	Affected <2.6.0	Fixed in 2.6.0
Packagistpontedilana/php-weasyprint`pkg:composer/pontedilana/php-weasyprint`Other threats	Affected <2.6.0	Fixed in 2.6.0

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

AI-suggested

PhpWeasyPrint version 2.6.0 contains a patch that addresses this vulnerability. Users should upgrade to version 2.6.0 or later to remediate this issue. No additional vendor advisory or temporary mitigations are provided. Patch status is confirmed by the version bump and description. Until upgraded, avoid passing untrusted input to the 'attachment' option or restrict URL schemes manually.

Description

PhpWeasyPrint is a PHP library allowing PDF generation from a URL or an HTML page. Prior to version 2.6.0, `pontedilana/php-weasyprint` fetches the content of option values server-side via `file_get_contents()` when the value looks like a URL, without restricting the URL scheme. The `attachment` option of `Pdf` is the reachable sink: any value that passes `isOptionUrl()` (`filter_var(..., FILTER_VALIDATE_URL)`) is downloaded by the PHP process and embedded into the generated PDF. Because `FILTER_VALIDATE_URL` accepts `http`, `https`, `ftp`, `file` and PHP stream wrappers such as `php://`, an attacker who can influence the `attachment` value reaches both a **Server-Side Request Forgery** primitive (e.g. internal HTTP endpoints, cloud metadata) and a local file disclosure primitive (`file://`, `php://filter/...`), with the fetched bytes exfiltrated as a PDF attachment. This is the same class of issue KnpLabs/snappy patched for its `xsl-style-sheet` option in GHSA-c5fp-p67m-gq56. The library is documented as a one-to-one substitute for KnpLabs/snappy and shares the same code shape. PhpWeasyPrint version 2.6.0 contains a patch for the issue.

Impact

An attacker with the ability to control the 'attachment' option value can cause the server to fetch arbitrary URLs or local files. This can lead to disclosure of sensitive internal resources, local files, or cloud metadata accessible from the server environment. The vulnerability allows exfiltration of the fetched content embedded in generated PDFs. The CVSS 3.1 base score is 6.5 (medium severity), reflecting network attack vector, low attack complexity, low privileges required, no user interaction, and high confidentiality impact without integrity or availability impact.

Summary

PhpWeasyPrint is a PHP library for generating PDFs from URLs or HTML pages. Prior to version 2.6.0, it uses file_get_contents() to fetch the content of option values that look like URLs, including the 'attachment' option of the Pdf class. The URL validation relies on FILTER_VALIDATE_URL, which accepts schemes such as http, https, ftp, file, and PHP stream wrappers like php://. This allows an attacker who can influence the 'attachment' option to perform Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) by making the server fetch arbitrary internal or external resources, including local files or PHP streams. The fetched content is then embedded as a PDF attachment, enabling exfiltration. This vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2026-49359 and was patched in php-weasyprint version 2.6.0.

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 26 Jun 2026, 19:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats