VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 28 Sep 2026

CVE-2025-50182: Ggshield · urllib3 does not control redirects in browsers and Node.js

Affects ggshieldSource GCVE Database

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium : upgrade to 1.48.0 when convenient.

Data as of 1 Nov 2026, 22:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

EPSS: 0.6% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 48% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 9.6.0_1, 0.48.1_2, 1.48.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
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: 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: 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 13 Aug 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 1 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 ggshield to 1.48.0; snakemake to 9.6.0_1; toot to 0.48.1_2.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewsnakemake`pkg:brew/snakemake`Other threats	Affected >=8.4.2 <9.6.0_1	Fixed in 9.6.0_1
Homebrewtoot`pkg:brew/toot`Other threats	Affected >=0.42.0 <0.48.1_2	Fixed in 0.48.1_2
Homebrewggshield`pkg:brew/ggshield`Other threats	Affected >=1.24.0 <1.48.0	Fixed in 1.48.0

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

AI-suggested

For Node.js environments using urllib3 in Pyodide, upgrade to a patched version of urllib3 that addresses this issue. For browser environments, no effective mitigation exists because XMLHttpRequest and the Fetch API do not provide mechanisms for controlling redirects in a way urllib3 can enforce. Users should be aware of this limitation and consider alternative approaches to mitigate SSRF or open redirect risks in browser-based Python code.

Description

urllib3, when used in a Pyodide runtime environment such as browsers or Node.js, does not enforce its redirect control parameters (`retries` and `redirect`). This is because the runtime itself controls redirect behavior, ignoring urllib3's settings. This can lead to applications relying on urllib3 for redirect control remaining vulnerable to SSRF or open redirect attacks if they depend on disabling redirects. A patched version of urllib3 is available for Node.js usage, but browsers inherently lack mechanisms to control redirects via XMLHttpRequest or the Fetch API, resulting in default redirect behavior.

Impact

Applications using urllib3 in Pyodide runtimes that rely on urllib3's redirect control to mitigate SSRF or open redirect vulnerabilities may remain exposed because redirect parameters are ignored. This can allow attackers to exploit redirects despite intended protections. The impact is limited to scenarios where redirect control is critical for security, and the environment is a Pyodide runtime. Node.js users can mitigate this by upgrading urllib3, but browser users face inherent limitations.

Summary

The vulnerability CVE-2025-50182 affects urllib3 when used in Pyodide runtimes (browser or Node.js environments). Although urllib3 provides parameters to control HTTP redirects, these parameters are ignored in Pyodide because the runtime (browser or Node.js) manages redirects independently. In browsers, XMLHttpRequest does not allow redirect control, and the Fetch API returns opaque redirect responses when redirects are manually controlled, preventing urllib3 from enforcing redirect limits. This behavior can undermine protections against SSRF or open redirect vulnerabilities if applications rely on urllib3's redirect control. A patch is available for Node.js environments, but no suitable fix exists for browser environments due to platform limitations.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 29 Sep 2026, 05:33 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats