CVE-2026-114609VulnerabilityPublished 29 Oct 2026

Keeper commander: fpdf2 implicitly loads external URLs and local image paths when rendering attacker-controlled

Affects keeper-commanderSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-114609· Medium 5.8

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.8 Medium : upgrade to 18.1.1 when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 07:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.8Medium

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	5.8

Patch: Available – fixed in 18.1.1

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: Low
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: 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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
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 22 Oct 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 29 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 keeper-commander to 18.1.1.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewkeeper-commander`pkg:brew/keeper-commander`Other threats	Affected >=17.0.21 <18.1.1	Fixed in 18.1.1

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

Description

## Summary `fpdf2` implicitly dereferences image resource references supplied to rendering APIs. If an application passes untrusted HTML, SVG, template data, or image paths into those APIs, `fpdf2` may issue outbound HTTP(S) requests or attempt to open local filesystem paths. This behavior is relevant in applications that render untrusted or user-provided input without sanitizing or restricting embedded resource references. ## Description In affected versions, `fpdf2` uses a shared internal image-loading mechanism for multiple features. This loader: * fetches `http://` and `https://` URLs over the network * opens other string values as local filesystem paths During document processing, resource references embedded in input content are automatically dereferenced using this mechanism. This behavior is reachable through: * `FPDF.image()` * `FPDF.write_html()` via HTML `<img src="...">` * `FPDF.image()` when rendering SVG files containing `<image href="...">` or `xlink:href="...">` * template image elements that forward values into `FPDF.image()` If an application renders attacker-controlled input through these APIs, that input can cause: * outbound HTTP(S) requests to attacker-chosen destinations * local file open attempts for attacker-chosen paths This may enable Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in applications that render untrusted content. Local file access impact is limited: the library attempts to open the referenced path, but successful embedding depends on the target being a valid and supported image or SVG resource. `file://` URLs are not specially handled; raw filesystem paths such as `/path/to/file` or `../../file.png` are the relevant local-path cases. ## Impact This issue affects applications that render untrusted or partially trusted content using `fpdf2`. Applications may be impacted if they: * pass untrusted HTML into `write_html()` * render untrusted SVG with embedded `<image>` references * pass user-controlled strings into `image()` * allow untrusted template definitions or template field values to control image paths Potential impacts include: * outbound requests to internal or external network services * limited local file access attempts depending on file type and parsing success (limited to content that fpdf2 recognizes as a supported image or SVG resource) The severity depends on how `fpdf2` is integrated and whether untrusted input is allowed to control resource references. **Example scenarios** HTML: ```python pdf.write_html('<img src="http://127.0.0.1:8000/internal.png">') ``` SVG: ```xml <image href="http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/" /> ``` Direct image path: ```python pdf.image("../../.env") ``` **Workarounds** Applications can mitigate this by: - not rendering untrusted HTML, SVG, or template content - rejecting user-controlled `src` / `href` / image-path values - mapping resources through an application-defined allowlist - converting user-supplied images to trusted in-memory objects before passing them to `fpdf2` **Credits** - @kule500 for identifying SSRF via HTML <img> handling - @BudongJW for identifying SVG <image> resource loading as an additional vector - @redyank for analysis of the shared image loading mechanism - @manop55555 for identifying a DNS rebinding bypass in the initial REMOTE_PUBLIC implementation

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…