Actix WebApplication · Actix
CVE-2018-25026
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn issue was discovered in the actix-web crate before 0.7.15 for Rust. It can add the Send marker trait to an object that cannot be sent between threads safely, leading to memory corruption.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe actix-web crate before 0.7.15 incorrectly implements the Send marker trait on types that are not actually safe to transfer between threads. This allows objects that contain non-thread-safe data to be marked as Send, enabling them to be moved across thread boundaries, which can cause data races and memory corruption.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Actix WebApplication
< 0.7.15CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate actix-web dependency in Cargo.lockSearch the Cargo.lock file for 'name = "actix-web"' and read the adjacent 'version' fieldAffected if The version listed is less than 0.7.15 (e.g., 0.7.14, 0.7.13, etc.)
-
Check direct dependencies in Cargo.tomlInspect the Cargo.toml file and look for actix-web under [dependencies] or [dev-dependencies], noting the specified version or git refAffected if A version constraint like "0.7" or "<0.7.15" is specified that resolves to a version below 0.7.15
-
Query installed crate version via CargoRun `cargo tree -p actix-web` or `cargo list --format json | grep actix-web` in the project directory to see the resolved versionAffected if The displayed version is any release prior to 0.7.15
-
Inspect Rust source for vulnerable Send implementationsSearch the project's Rust source files for impl Send for or derive(Send) on types containing interior mutability (RefCell, Cell, Rc, or non-Send wrappers) used in actix-web handlersAffected if Code contains custom Send implementations or derive(Send) on types wrapping RefCell, Rc, or other non-Send primitives used across async boundaries
You are affected if your project depends on any version of actix-web prior to 0.7.15, as the incorrect Send trait implementation could allow data races in multi-threaded contexts.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped0.7.15
Upgrade actix-web to version 0.7.15 or later to obtain the corrected Send trait implementation.
actix-web version 0.7.15 or later
- Update the actix-web dependency in your Cargo.toml file to version 0.7.15 or later
- Run cargo update actix-web to fetch the new version
- Run cargo build or cargo check to verify the update compiles successfully
- Run your test suite to ensure no regressions were introduced
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Actix Web
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,144.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-25026 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-25026 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data