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

CVE-2025-59344

HIGH · 7.7 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-09-19
Patch available
A vendor patch is available. No clean upgrade release — apply the published patch.
See remediation →
83/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable Zero-click Patch available

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
AliasVault is a privacy-first password manager with built-in email aliasing. A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the favicon extraction feature of AliasVault API versions 0.23.0 and lower. The extractor fetches a user-supplied URL, parses the returned HTML, and follows <link rel="icon" href="…">. Although the initial URL is validated to allow only HTTP/HTTPS with default ports, the extractor automatically follows redirects and does not block requests to loopback or internal IP ranges. An authenticated, low-privileged user can exploit this behavior to coerce the backend into making HTTP(S) requests to arbitrary internal hosts and non-default ports. If the target host serves a favicon or any other valid image, the response is returned to the attacker in Base64 form. Even when no data is returned, timing and error behavior can be abused to map internal services. This vulnerability only affects self-hosted AliasVault instances that are reachable from the public internet with public user registration enabled. Private/internal deployments without public sign-ups are not directly exploitable. This issue has been fixed in AliasVault release 0.23.1.

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
How this class of weakness works · CWE-918

The server can be induced to make requests to a URL an attacker controls, turning it into a proxy into internal networks and cloud metadata services. It's especially dangerous behind a trusted network boundary. The fix is strict allow-listing of destinations and blocking access to internal address ranges.

General guidance for the server-side request forgery (ssrf) class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →

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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

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

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 · scoped
Patch available Apply the vendor patch
Vendor patch github.com →
Recommended fix High confidence

0.23.1

  1. Back up the current AliasVault installation and database before upgrading
  2. Update AliasVault to version 0.23.1
  3. After upgrading, verify the service starts correctly
  4. Confirm the SSRF fix is applied by reviewing the commit at https://github.com/aliasvault/aliasvault/commit/58c39815e4c8bb27a311c3b592d54e157b4e6968

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can apply and verify the patch for your build — typical engagement from $3,200. Get the patch applied

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-59344 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

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-2025-59344 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