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

CVE-2026-46372

HIGH · 8.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-05-29
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
91/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
SillyTavern is a locally installed user interface that allows users to interact with text generation large language models, image generation engines, and text-to-speech voice models. Prior to 1.18.0, SillyTavern exposes /api/search/searxng, which accepts attacker-controlled baseUrl and uses it directly to build outbound server-side fetches. An authenticated low-privilege user can point baseUrl at an internal or loopback HTTP service and receive the /search response body. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.18.0.

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 confidence

SillyTavern before 1.18.0 contains a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the /api/search/searxng endpoint. The endpoint accepts a baseUrl parameter that is used directly in outbound server-side HTTP requests without validation, allowing an authenticated low-privilege user to target internal or loopback services and exfiltrate their responses.

MitigationUpgrade SillyTavern to version 1.18.0 or later to receive the patch that validates the baseUrl parameter.

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
Low
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/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 SillyTavern version
    Locate the version file or check the package.json in your SillyTavern installation directory; alternatively, check the startup logs for the version number
    Affected if The installed version is below 1.18.0
  2. Verify searxng search feature is enabled
    Check your SillyTavern configuration files (config.yaml, config.json, or similar) for the searxng search module settings; look for whether it is listed in enabled search providers
    Affected if The searxng search provider is configured and enabled in your SillyTavern settings
  3. Confirm API endpoint accessibility
    Attempt to access the /api/search/searxng endpoint with a test request, or review server access logs for existing calls to this endpoint
    Affected if The endpoint is exposed and responds to requests (returns 200 or other HTTP response rather than 404)
  4. Test baseUrl parameter validation
    Send a crafted request to /api/search/searxng with a baseUrl parameter pointing to an internal address (127.0.0.1) or a known external URL and observe if the server attempts the outbound connection
    Affected if The server accepts and acts on a baseUrl parameter without rejecting internal/loopback addresses

You are affected if SillyTavern version is below 1.18.0 AND the searxng search feature is enabled, allowing the /api/search/searxng endpoint to accept arbitrary URLs via the baseUrl parameter.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade SillyTavern to version 1.18.0 or later to receive the patch that validates the baseUrl parameter.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.18.0

  1. 1. Check the currently installed SillyTavern version
  2. 2. Upgrade SillyTavern to version 1.18.0 or later to remediate the SSRF vulnerability

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
7.0 hours of engineering $1,240
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-46372 — 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-2026-46372 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