VulnerabilityPublished 14 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-73497: sooperset mcp-atlassian · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Affects sooperset mcp-atlassianSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 0.22.0 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 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 31% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.22.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: Low
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 14 Sep 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 mcp-atlassian and sooperset/mcp-atlassian to 0.22.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
soopersetmcp-atlassian	Affected >=0.17.0 <0.22.0	Fixed in 0.22.0
GitHubsooperset/mcp-atlassian`pkg:github/sooperset/mcp-atlassian`Other threats	Affected >=0.17.0 <0.22.0	Fixed in 0.22.0

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade to version 0.22.0 or later where this vulnerability is fixed. The fix addresses the lack of IP pinning during hostname resolution, preventing DNS rebinding attacks. No other mitigation is required once the upgrade is applied.

Description

MCP Atlassian is a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for Atlassian products (Confluence and Jira). From 0.17.0 until 0.22.0, validate_url_for_ssrf resolves the attacker-controlled X-Atlassian-Jira-Url and X-Atlassian-Confluence-Url header host once at middleware time, but the outbound request is built with the raw hostname and resolves it again at connection time with no IP pinning. An attacker-controlled DNS-rebinding name can return a public IP during validation and 169.254.169.254 or another internal IP during connection, enabling unauthenticated server-side requests to cloud metadata or internal services. The flaw spans src/mcp_atlassian/utils/urls.py, src/mcp_atlassian/servers/main.py, and src/mcp_atlassian/servers/dependencies.py; validate_url_for_ssrf returns only a verdict rather than a pinned IP, UserTokenMiddleware processes the attacker-controlled headers before fetcher creation, and the Jira and Confluence fetchers use the raw hostname. This issue is fixed in version 0.22.0.

Impact

An attacker can exploit this SSRF vulnerability to make unauthorized server-side requests to internal network resources or cloud metadata services, potentially exposing sensitive information or enabling further attacks. The vulnerability does not require authentication but has a high confidentiality impact, with limited integrity impact and no availability impact.

Summary

The vulnerability in sooperset mcp-atlassian (CVE-2026-73497) involves the validate_url_for_ssrf function resolving attacker-controlled X-Atlassian-Jira-Url and X-Atlassian-Confluence-Url headers only once during middleware processing. However, the actual outbound request uses the raw hostname and performs a second DNS resolution at connection time without IP pinning. This discrepancy allows an attacker to use DNS rebinding techniques to bypass validation by returning a public IP during validation and an internal IP (such as 169.254.169.254) during connection, enabling unauthenticated SSRF attacks to internal or cloud metadata services. The flaw affects multiple source files and is fixed in version 0.22.0.

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 22 Sep 2026, 01:23 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-918

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats