CVE-2026-35527
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 · uneditedIncus is an open source container and virtual machine manager. In versions prior to 7.0.0, the image import flow issues an outbound HEAD request to a user-supplied URL before validating the request against project restrictions such as restricted.images.servers. The imgPostURLInfo function constructs and sends a HEAD request directly from the attacker-supplied source URL to resolve image metadata, and this network interaction occurs before the flow reaches the point where the import would be rejected by policy. Although the actual image download is blocked by the project restriction, an authenticated user can coerce the daemon into making blind HEAD requests to arbitrary destinations. These requests include server metadata in custom headers (Incus-Server-Architectures, Incus-Server-Version), which discloses information about the host environment to the attacker-controlled endpoint. This blind SSRF primitive can be used to probe internal services, unroutable address space, or cloud metadata endpoints reachable from the host. This vulnerability pattern is similar to CVE-2026-24767. This issue has been fixed in version 7.0.0.
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 analysisThe 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 →
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< 7.0.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/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 · scoped7.0.0
7.0.0
- Identify all Incus installations running versions prior to 7.0.0
- Plan and schedule a maintenance window for the upgrade
- Backup Incus data and configuration following standard backup procedures
- Upgrade Incus to version 7.0.0 using the appropriate package manager or installation method for your environment
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the Incus version
- Confirm the image import flow now correctly validates against project restrictions before making outbound requests
- Test that the vulnerability is resolved by attempting (in a test environment) to import an image from an arbitrary URL and verify it is properly blocked
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-35527 — 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-2026-35527 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