VulnerabilityPublished 2 Jul 2026Updated 8 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-59095: lobehub · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects lobehubSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Public exploit available · CVSS 7.7 High : upgrade to 2.2.10 as a priority.

Data as of 8 Nov 2026, 14:35 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.7High

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 3.1	7.7
CNA (VulnCheck)	CVSS 4.0	8.3

Exploitation: Proof of concept is public or traded
Automatable: Attackers cannot reliably automate steps 1–4 of the kill chain
Technical impact: Limited control over the software or limited information exposure

CISA SSVC assessment, 2026-07-06.

Patch

Available – fixed in 2.2.10

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Jul 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: evidence found.
CISA SSVC: proof of concept public
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

CVE ID reserved
by VulnCheck
2 Jul 202615:38 UTC, 4 hours before disclosure
CVE published
on cve.org
2 Jul 202619:41 UTC, t = 0
CISA SSVC assessment
proof of concept public
6 Jul 202619:00 UTC, 4 days after disclosure

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), CISA SSVC, the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 8 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 lobehub to 2.2.10.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
lobehublobehub	Affected <2.2.10	Fixed in 2.2.10
GitHublobehub`pkg:github/lobehub`Other threats	Affected <2.2.10	Fixed in 2.2.10

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade LobeChat to version 2.2.10 or later, where this SSRF vulnerability is fixed by using the SSRF-safe-fetch wrapper in the affected endpoints. No other mitigation is necessary as the fix is available and official.

Description

LobeChat versions before 2.2.10-canary.18 contain a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability. Authenticated attackers can exploit this flaw by supplying crafted URLs to the skill import and topic cover update endpoints, which do not use the project's SSRF-safe fetch wrapper. This allows attackers to make internal HTTP requests to arbitrary URLs, including sensitive internal services such as cloud instance metadata endpoints, potentially disclosing internal service responses and cloud credentials.

Impact

An authenticated attacker can exploit this SSRF vulnerability to make the server perform HTTP requests to internal network resources or external arbitrary URLs. This can lead to disclosure of sensitive internal service responses and cloud credentials, potentially compromising the confidentiality of the affected environment. The vulnerability does not impact integrity or availability directly but poses a significant confidentiality risk.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Nov 2026, 14:35 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats