CVE-2026-42398
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 · uneditedServer-Side Request Forgery (CWE-918) in Kibana allows authenticated users with connector management privileges to bypass the operator-configured connection allowlist. By configuring a Webhook connector with a crafted target, an attacker can cause Kibana to issue outbound requests to destinations that the egress restriction controls were intended to block.
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 confidenceServer-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Kibana allows authenticated users with connector management privileges to bypass operator-configured connection allowlists by configuring Webhook connectors with crafted malicious targets, enabling outbound requests to destinations that egress restriction controls were intended to block.
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>= 9.0.0, < 9.2.8>= 9.3.0, < 9.3.2CVSS 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 installed Kibana versionRun 'bin/kibana --version' or check the version field in the Kibana status API (/api/status), or inspect the package.json file in the Kibana installation directoryAffected if The installed version falls within >= 9.0.0 and < 9.2.8, or >= 9.0.0 and < 9.3.2 (specifically >= 9.3.0 and < 9.3.2)
-
Confirm connector management privileges existReview Kibana roles and user permissions to determine if any users have connector creation or management privileges, typically found in the Security > Privileges section of Kibana or in the roles.yml configuration fileAffected if Any user account (other than dedicated administrators) has been granted connector management or webhook connector creation privileges
-
Enumerate existing Webhook connectorsQuery the Kibana saved objects API for connectors of type 'webhook' using GET /api/saved_objects/_find?type=connector, or navigate to Stack Management > Saved Objects > Connectors in the Kibana UIAffected if Any Webhook connectors are present in the environment, particularly those with externally reachable or unusual URL targets
-
Inspect Webhook connector URLs for suspicious targetsReview the configuration of each Webhook connector by querying GET /api/saved_objects/connector/<id> and examining the 'urls' or 'config' fields for destinations that should be blocked by network egress controlsAffected if Webhook connectors are configured with URLs pointing to internal services, cloud metadata endpoints, or IP addresses that should be restricted from outbound access
You are affected if your Kibana version is 9.0.0 through 9.2.7, or 9.3.0 through 9.3.1, AND any user has connector management privileges with Webhook connectors configured to potentially bypass your network allowlists.
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 · scoped9.2.89.3.2
Restrict connector management privileges to minimal necessary trusted users, audit existing connector configurations for suspicious targets, and enforce strict egress allowlist controls at the network level in addition to Kibana configuration.
Upgrade to Kibana 9.2.8 (for 9.0.x-9.2.x users) or Kibana 9.3.2 (for 9.3.0-9.3.1 users)
- 1. Identify the current Kibana version by checking the Kibana about page or the kibana.yml configuration file
- 2. If running Kibana 9.0.0 through 9.2.7, plan an upgrade to version 9.2.8 or later
- 3. If running Kibana 9.3.0 through 9.3.1, plan an upgrade to version 9.3.2 or later
- 4. Review the Elastic Kibana upgrade documentation for your current version
- 5. Create a backup of your Kibana configuration and data directories
- 6. Test the upgrade in a staging environment before deploying to production
- 7. Schedule the upgrade during a planned maintenance window
- 8. Stop the Kibana service before applying the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-42398 — 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-2026-42398 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