CVE-2026-45012
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 · uneditedApostropheCMS is an open-source Node.js content management system. Versions up to and including 4.29.0 contain an authenticated server-side request forgery (SSRF) in the rich-text widget import flow. An authenticated user who can submit/edit rich-text widget content can cause the server to fetch attacker-controlled URLs during widget validation. For image-compatible responses, the fetched content can be persisted and re-hosted by Apostrophe, allowing response exfiltration. As of time of publication, no known patched versions are available.
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 confidenceAuthenticated SSRF vulnerability in ApostropheCMS rich-text widget import flow (versions <=4.29.0). An authenticated user with rich-text widget content creation/editing privileges can cause the server to fetch arbitrary attacker-controlled URLs during widget validation. Image-compatible responses are persisted and re-hosted by the application, enabling response exfiltration.
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
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify installed ApostropheCMS versionCheck your project's package.json for the 'apostrophe' or '@apostrophecms/core' package version, or run 'npm list apostrophe' in your project directoryAffected if The installed version is 4.29.0 or lower
-
Confirm rich-text widget module is enabledReview your app.js or modules.js configuration for the '@apostrophecms/rich-text-widget' module being loaded, or check if any piece or page type schemas include richText field typesAffected if The rich-text widget module is present and actively used in your project configuration
-
Audit user permissions for rich-text content editingExamine your user roles, groups, or permissions configuration (typically in lib/modules/@apostrophecms/user/ or similar) to determine which roles have create/edit permissions on rich-text or widget contentAffected if Any authenticated user role beyond highly trusted administrators has permission to create or edit rich-text widget content
-
Inspect widget import validation logicSearch your project source code or ApostropheCMS modules for custom validation or URL handling logic related to widget imports, particularly around image processing in the rich-text widgetAffected if No custom URL validation or allowlisting is implemented in your widget import flow
You are affected if your ApostropheCMS version is 4.29.0 or lower, the rich-text widget module is enabled, and users with standard or untrusted permissions can create or edit rich-text content.
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 validation/whitelisting in the widget import flow, restrict rich-text widget permissions to highly trusted users only, and add network-level controls to prevent server-side requests to internal infrastructure or sensitive endpoints until an official patch is released.
- 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-2026-45012 — 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-2026-45012 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