CVE-2026-3681
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 · uneditedA weakness has been identified in welovemedia FFmate up to 2.0.15. This affects the function fireWebhook of the file /internal/service/webhook/webhook.go. Executing a manipulation can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 · moderate confidenceServer-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in welovemedia FFmate's fireWebhook function in /internal/service/webhook/webhook.go allows remote attackers to manipulate the webhook URL to make the server perform arbitrary requests to internal or external 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
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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.
-
Verify FFmate installationLocate the FFmate binary or service installation directory on the system. Common paths include /usr/local/bin/ffmate, /opt/ffmate, or check system services.Affected if FFmate is not installed on the system
-
Identify FFmate versionRun 'ffmate --version' or check the binary metadata to determine the installed version number.Affected if The installed version falls within an affected range and the webhook feature is in use
-
Confirm webhook feature is enabledInspect the FFmate configuration file (typically ffmate.yaml, config.yml, or similar) for any webhook-related settings. Look for entries under 'webhook', 'webhooks', or similar sections.Affected if Webhook configuration exists and the fireWebhook function is accessible
-
Inspect webhook URL configurationExamine the webhook configuration for any user-controllable or externally-sourced URL parameters. Check if webhook URLs can be set via API, config file, or user input.Affected if Webhook URLs are not restricted to a pre-defined allowlist or are derived from user input
-
Check network egress controlsReview firewall rules or network policies to determine if the FFmate server has unrestricted outbound network access.Affected if The server can make arbitrary HTTP/HTTPS requests to internal or external resources without restriction
A user is affected if FFmate is installed with the webhook feature enabled and the webhook URL can be controlled or is not restricted to an allowlist, allowing SSRF attacks.
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 and input validation for webhook URLs; restrict outbound network access through firewall rules; consider disabling the webhook feature until a vendor patch is available.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-3681 — 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-2026-3681 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