CVE-2026-10055
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 · uneditedIn Eclipse Theia since version 1.26.0, the backend /services/request-service RPC accepts an attacker-controlled URL from any client connected to the standard /services messaging endpoint, performs the HTTP request server-side, and returns the full response body to the caller. Because the destination URL is neither validated nor allowlisted, a remote attacker with access to the Theia service connection can issue server-side HTTP requests to localhost or other backend-reachable hosts and read their responses, exposing internal administrative endpoints, cloud instance metadata services, and other resources that are intentionally outside the browser network boundary. The vulnerability affects deployments where the Theia service connection is reachable by untrusted users (for example, multi-tenant or publicly-reachable Theia deployments).
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 confidenceEclipse Theia versions 1.26.0+ contain an SSRF vulnerability in the backend /services/request-service RPC. The endpoint accepts attacker-controlled URLs from any client connected to the /services messaging endpoint, performs HTTP requests server-side without URL validation, and returns full response bodies. This allows remote attackers with service connection access to target internal services, cloud metadata endpoints, and localhost resources.
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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check Theia versionLocate the installed Theia version (typically in package.json, about dialog, or IDE metadata). Compare it to the affected range: version 1.26.0 or higher.Affected if Installed version is 1.26.0 or higher
-
Identify request-service exposureInspect the backend service configuration to determine if the /services/request-service RPC endpoint is enabled and accessible. This is typically configured in the backend service definitions or extension setup.Affected if The request-service RPC endpoint is exposed and reachable by clients
-
Verify client connectivity to /servicesDetermine whether untrusted or public clients can connect to the /services messaging endpoint, as the CVE states the attacker needs service connection access.Affected if Untrusted or anonymous clients can connect to the /services messaging endpoint
-
Check for URL validationReview any existing URL validation, allowlisting, or restriction configurations around the request-service to see if it validates or restricts destination URLs before making requests.Affected if No URL validation or allowlisting mechanism is configured for the request-service
A user is affected if they run Theia 1.26.0+ with the request-service RPC endpoint enabled and accessible to untrusted clients without any URL validation in place.
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.
From vendor dataImplement strict URL allowlisting or validation for the request-service to restrict destinations to trusted external resources only, and consider network segmentation to limit backend access to sensitive internal services.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-10055 — 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-2026-10055 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