CVE-2026-39965
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 · uneditedTypeBot is a chatbot builder tool. Versions 3.15.2 and prior contain an SSRF via Open Redirect Bypass as the HTTP Request block and Code block validate the initial request URL via validateHttpReqUrl() to block private IPs and cloud metadata hostnames. However, the HTTP clients (ky and fetch) follow 302 redirects without re-validating the redirect destination. An authenticated user can point a bot block to an attacker-controlled server that responds with a redirect to an internal IP, causing the Typebot server to reach internal services. An authenticated Typebot user can reach AWS metadata (169.254.169.254), private subnets, and container-internal services. Exploitable to extract cloud IAM credentials or probe internal APIs inaccessible from the internet. This issue has been fixed in version 3.16.0.
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 analysis · high confidenceTypeBot versions 3.15.2 and prior have an SSRF vulnerability where the HTTP Request and Code blocks validate initial URLs to block private IPs and cloud metadata endpoints via validateHttpReqUrl(), but the underlying HTTP clients (ky and fetch) automatically follow 302 redirects without re-validating the redirect destination. An authenticated attacker can set up a malicious server that returns a redirect to internal infrastructure (AWS metadata at 169.254.169.254, private subnets, container networks), bypassing the initial validation.
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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify TypeBot versionCheck your installed TypeBot version (typically in package.json, Docker image tag, or admin dashboard). Compare it to the affected range: versions 3.15.2 and prior are vulnerable.Affected if Installed version is 3.15.2 or lower
-
Confirm HTTP Request block usageExamine your TypeBot flows for any HTTP Request blocks that make outbound HTTP calls. Inspect the flow configuration to see which bots contain this block type.Affected if Flows contain HTTP Request blocks making requests to external URLs
-
Confirm Code block usageReview any Code blocks that execute JavaScript with HTTP client calls (ky, fetch) or server-side code making outbound HTTP requests.Affected if Code blocks contain HTTP client calls to external URLs
-
Check for custom redirect validationIf you have access to the TypeBot source or custom deployment, inspect the HTTP client configuration (ky, fetch) to see if validateHttpReqUrl() is called on redirect responses, not just initial requests.Affected if No redirect destination validation is performed on HTTP clients
-
Review network segmentationInspect your firewall or network policy to determine if outbound requests from the TypeBot server to internal infrastructure (e.g., 169.254.169.254, internal IPs) are blocked.Affected if No network restrictions prevent requests to cloud metadata endpoints or internal IPs
You are affected if your TypeBot version is 3.15.2 or prior AND you use HTTP Request blocks or Code blocks that can make outbound HTTP requests to attacker-controlled servers.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to TypeBot version 3.16.0 or later, which implements redirect destination validation. If immediate patching is not feasible, implement custom HTTP client configuration that either disables automatic redirect following or validates all redirect destinations against the same restrictions applied to initial URLs.
3.16.0
- 1. Check the currently running TypeBot version by inspecting the package.json file or running the version command
- 2. Create a complete backup of the TypeBot database and configuration files before upgrading
- 3. Upgrade TypeBot to version 3.16.0 using the package manager (e.g., npm install [email protected] or docker pull typebot/typebot:3.16.0)
- 4. Restart all TypeBot services to apply the new version
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the running version matches 3.16.0
- 6. Test HTTP Request block functionality to confirm redirects are now properly validated before following them
- 7. Review authentication logs to detect any potential exploitation attempts prior to the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-39965 — 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-2026-39965 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