dbcve.org
Claude CodeApplication · Anthropic

CVE-2026-24052

HIGH · 7.4 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-02-03
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 1.0.111 or later.
See remediation →
81/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges

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
Claude Code is an agentic coding tool. Prior to version 1.0.111, Claude Code contained insufficient URL validation in its trusted domain verification mechanism for WebFetch requests. The application used a startsWith() function to validate trusted domains (e.g., docs.python.org, modelcontextprotocol.io), this could have enabled attackers to register domains like modelcontextprotocol.io.example.com that would pass validation. This could enable automatic requests to attacker-controlled domains without user consent, potentially leading to data exfiltration. This issue has been patched in version 1.0.111.

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

Claude Code's WebFetch feature validated trusted domains using startsWith() comparison, allowing attackers to bypass validation by registering domains like modelcontextprotocol.io.example.com that start with the whitelisted domain. This enabled unauthorized automatic requests to attacker-controlled domains.

MitigationUpgrade Claude Code to version 1.0.111 or later, which implements proper URL/domain validation instead of startsWith() checking.

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
Claude CodeApplication
Affected:< 1.0.111

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
Required
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/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. Check if Claude Code is installed
    Run 'claude --version' in the terminal or look for Claude Code installation in standard locations like /usr/local/bin/claude, ~/.local/bin/claude, or via system package managers
    Affected if Claude Code is not installed - not affected
  2. Determine installed Claude Code version
    Execute 'claude --version' and compare the version number against the affected range (versions before 1.0.111 are vulnerable)
    Affected if The installed version is 1.0.110 or lower - vulnerable if WebFetch is used
  3. Verify WebFetch feature is in use
    Review Claude Code configuration files in ~/.claude/ or project-specific .claude/settings.json for WebFetch or httpFetch settings, and check conversation history for any web request patterns
    Affected if WebFetch is enabled or has been used - vulnerability is applicable
  4. Check trusted domain configuration
    Examine Claude Code configuration files for any whitelisted/trusted domains specified for WebFetch functionality
    Affected if Trusted domains are configured using prefix-based validation - the startsWith() bypass could be exploited

You are affected if Claude Code version is below 1.0.111, the WebFetch feature is enabled or has been used, and trusted domains are configured for automatic web requests.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 1.0.111 or later
Fixed in 1.0.111
Interim mitigation

Upgrade Claude Code to version 1.0.111 or later, which implements proper URL/domain validation instead of startsWith() checking.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.0.111

  1. Upgrade Claude Code to version 1.0.111 or later to obtain the patched URL validation mechanism that properly validates trusted domains

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

Fix this in Claude Code Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
7.0 hours of engineering $1,210
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,936.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-24052 — 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-2026-24052 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