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

CVE-2026-47160

MEDIUM · 5.8 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-07-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
67/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click 5 weeks old

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
Vaultwarden is a Bitwarden-compatible server written in Rust. Prior to 1.36.0, Vaultwarden's /icons/{domain}/icon.png endpoint used src/http_client.rs checks including should_block_address() and post_resolve() that missed decimal, hexadecimal, and octal IP representations, allowing SSRF through the icon-fetching HTTP client for blind internal network or port discovery. This issue is fixed in version 1.36.0.

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

Vaultwarden's icon-fetching endpoint at /icons/{domain}/icon.png contains SSRF vulnerability due to incomplete IP address validation in http_client.rs. The should_block_address() and post_resolve() functions fail to block decimal, hexadecimal, and octal IP representations, allowing attackers to bypass blocklists and probe internal network services.

MitigationUpgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.36.0 or later, which implements proper validation of alternative IP address formats in the icon-fetching HTTP client.

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
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Vaultwarden version
    Check the running Vaultwarden container image tag, or check the binary version with 'vaultwarden --version' or by examining the Docker/container metadata
    Affected if The installed version is earlier than 1.36.0
  2. Verify icon endpoint is accessible
    Confirm the /icons/{domain}/icon.png endpoint is reachable from the network. This is the vulnerable attack surface.
    Affected if The icon endpoint is exposed and responds to requests (even if only internally)
  3. Check for alternative IP format handling in configuration
    Review Vaultwarden's configuration files and environment variables for any network restrictions or PROXY settings. The vulnerability exists in the http_client.rs IP validation routines.
    Affected if No additional IP validation layers are implemented beyond Vaultwarden's built-in should_block_address() function, which is known to be incomplete in versions before 1.36.0
  4. Compare against affected version range
    Document the exact Vaultwarden version and compare it to the fixed version 1.36.0
    Affected if The version is below 1.36.0 and the icon-fetching feature is enabled

A user is affected if Vaultwarden version is below 1.36.0 and the icon endpoint at /icons/{domain}/icon.png is accessible, since the built-in IP address validation in http_client.rs fails to block decimal, hexadecimal, and octal IP representations.

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 Vaultwarden to version 1.36.0 or later, which implements proper validation of alternative IP address formats in the icon-fetching HTTP client.

Recommended fix High confidence

1.36.0

  1. Identify the current Vaultwarden version currently running (e.g., check docker image tag or binary version)
  2. Upgrade Vaultwarden to version 1.36.0 or later
  3. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the version
  4. Confirm the /icons/{domain}/icon.png endpoint now properly blocks decimal, hexadecimal, and octal IP representations
Caveat Review Vaultwarden 1.36.0 release notes for any compatibility notes, though this is primarily a security fix

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

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation1.0 h
  • Implementation2.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
7.0 hours of engineering $1,190
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,904.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-47160 — 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-2026-47160 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