Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)Weakness · CWE-918

CVE-2025-11864

HIGH · 7.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-16
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
A vulnerability was identified in NucleoidAI Nucleoid up to 0.7.10. The impacted element is the function extension.apply of the file /src/cluster.ts of the component Outbound Request Handler. Such manipulation of the argument https/ip/port/path/headers leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote.

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 confidence

A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the extension.apply function within /src/cluster.ts of the NucleoidAI Nucleoid component. The function accepts user-controlled input for URL parameters (https/ip/port/path/headers) without proper validation, allowing an attacker to manipulate the outbound request handler to make requests to arbitrary internal or external resources.

MitigationImplement strict input validation and allowlist-based filtering for all URL parameters (ip, port, path, headers) in the extension.apply function to ensure only permitted destinations can be accessed.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

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

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate the Nucleoid component installation
    Search for the cluster.ts file within the NucleoidAI Nucleoid codebase. Common paths include /src/cluster.ts or similar directory structures under the project root.
    Affected if The file /src/cluster.ts exists and contains the extension.apply function
  2. Identify the vulnerable function
    Open /src/cluster.ts and locate the extension.apply function. Search for code that handles URL parameters such as url, ip, port, path, or headers.
    Affected if The extension.apply function exists and processes URL-related parameters (https, ip, port, path, headers)
  3. Verify lack of input validation
    Examine the code within extension.apply that processes the URL parameters. Check if there are any validation, sanitization, or allowlist checks applied to these parameters before they are used in outbound requests.
    Affected if The URL parameters (ip, port, path, headers) are used directly in request handling without proper validation or allowlisting
  4. Confirm the function is exposed to user input
    Trace how the extension.apply function is called. Determine if user-controlled data can reach the url parameter inputs through API endpoints, configuration files, or other entry points.
    Affected if User-supplied data can reach the extension.apply function's URL parameter inputs without sufficient filtering

You are affected if the NucleoidAI Nucleoid component is installed with the extension.apply function in /src/cluster.ts that processes URL parameters (ip, port, path, headers) from user input without validation or allowlisting.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict input validation and allowlist-based filtering for all URL parameters (ip, port, path, headers) in the extension.apply function to ensure only permitted destinations can be accessed.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-11864 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-11864 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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