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

CVE-2025-52362

CRITICAL · 9.1 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-07-21
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the URL processing functionality of PHProxy version 1.1.1 and prior. The input validation for the _proxurl parameter can be bypassed, allowing a remote, unauthenticated attacker to submit a specially crafted URL

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 · moderate confidence

PHProxy version 1.1.1 and prior contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in its URL processing functionality. The _proxurl parameter, intended to accept URLs for the proxy to fetch, has insufficient input validation that can be bypassed by remote, unauthenticated attackers. This allows attackers to make the server request arbitrary URLs, potentially accessing internal services, cloud metadata endpoints, or internal network resources.

MitigationImplement strict input validation and whitelisting for the _proxurl parameter to ensure only intended URLs are processed; consider adding IP range blocking (especially RFC 1918 addresses and cloud metadata endpoints) and validating URL schemes to http/https only. If a patched version is available, upgrade immediately.

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
High
Integrity
High
Availability
None

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

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 PHProxy installation
    Search web server directories for PHProxy files (index.php, proxy.php, or class.proxy.php), or check for the PHProxy string in web application source code.
    Affected if PHProxy is found on the system
  2. Determine PHProxy version
    Open the main PHP file (typically index.php or proxy.php) and look for a version string in comments, variable definitions, or a dedicated version/info file.
    Affected if Version is 1.1.1 or prior, or version cannot be determined but the software is present
  3. Verify _proxurl parameter is accessible
    Send a GET request to the PHProxy entry point with a test _proxurl parameter (e.g., ?_proxurl=http://example.com) and observe if the server attempts to fetch the URL.
    Affected if The server processes the _proxurl parameter and makes outgoing requests to arbitrary URLs
  4. Confirm SSRF bypass is possible
    Test the _proxurl parameter with an internal or alternate URL (e.g., http://169.254.169.254/ or other controlled endpoint) and verify that the server successfully fetches and returns content from that URL.
    Affected if Input validation on _proxurl can be bypassed and the server fetches arbitrary URLs

A system is affected if it runs PHProxy version 1.1.1 or prior where the _proxurl parameter is exposed and processes requests to arbitrary URLs without proper validation.

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 whitelisting for the _proxurl parameter to ensure only intended URLs are processed; consider adding IP range blocking (especially RFC 1918 addresses and cloud metadata endpoints) and validating URL schemes to http/https only. If a patched version is available, upgrade immediately.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
20.0 hours of engineering $3,500
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,600.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-52362 — 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-2025-52362 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