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

CVE-2026-36764

MEDIUM · 5.0 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-30
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
56/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable 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
A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) in the /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint of SpringBlade v4.8.0 allows authenticated attackers to scan internal resources via a crafted GET request.

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

SpringBlade v4.8.0 contains an SSRF vulnerability in the /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint. Authenticated users can supply arbitrary URLs in the testConnection request, causing the server to make requests to attacker-controlled or internal resources. This enables internal network scanning and potential access to internal services.

MitigationImplement strict URL validation with an allowlist-based approach for the testConnection endpoint, restricting connections to approved external destinations only. Additionally, enforce network segmentation to prevent the application server from initiating connections to sensitive internal 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
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/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. Identify SpringBlade version
    Locate the SpringBlade deployment and check the version identifier (typically in pom.xml, application properties, or the deployed WAR/JAR file name). Compare against v4.8.0.
    Affected if Running SpringBlade version 4.8.0 or a version that includes the vulnerable /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint.
  2. Verify the /ureport endpoint exists
    Check if the /ureport/datasource/testConnection REST endpoint is present in the deployed application by reviewing the application war file, checking available routes in the Spring MVC configuration, or attempting to access the endpoint with a valid auth token.
    Affected if The /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint is exposed and accessible to authenticated users.
  3. Confirm UReport module is enabled
    Review the SpringBlade configuration files and verify whether the UReport (ureport) datasource module is loaded and enabled in the running instance.
    Affected if The UReport datasource module is enabled, making the testConnection functionality available.
  4. Check authentication configuration
    Review SpringBlade's security configuration to confirm which authenticated roles or users can access the /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint. Look at Spring Security or Shiro ACL rules for this path.
    Affected if Authenticated users (beyond only administrative accounts) can reach the testConnection endpoint.

You are affected if running SpringBlade v4.8.0 with the UReport datasource module enabled and the /ureport/datasource/testConnection endpoint accessible to authenticated users.

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 URL validation with an allowlist-based approach for the testConnection endpoint, restricting connections to approved external destinations only. Additionally, enforce network segmentation to prevent the application server from initiating connections to sensitive internal resources.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,200
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-36764 — 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-2026-36764 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