CVE-2026-5205
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was identified in chatwoot up to 4.11.2. Affected by this vulnerability is the function Webhooks::Trigger in the library lib/webhooks/trigger.rb of the component Webhook API. Such manipulation of the argument url leads to server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 Chatwoot's Webhook API allows remote attackers to manipulate the url parameter in the Webhooks::Trigger function (lib/webhooks/trigger.rb) to make the server request arbitrary URLs, potentially exposing internal services or facilitating further attacks.
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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 Chatwoot versionCheck the installed version by looking at the version file (config/VERSION) or the gem specification. In a running instance, you can typically find this via the UI footer or by running 'cat config/VERSION' in the installation directory.Affected if The installed version falls within any known vulnerable version range for CVE-2026-5205, or if the version cannot be determined and the webhook trigger functionality exists.
-
Locate the webhook trigger moduleFind the file lib/webhooks/trigger.rb in the Chatwoot installation directory and inspect its contents.Affected if The file lib/webhooks/trigger.rb exists and contains a url parameter handling mechanism that lacks proper URL validation.
-
Verify if webhook URL validation existsReview the trigger.rb file for any URL validation logic. Look for code that checks URL schemes (should only allow https), validates against internal/private network addresses (localhost, 127.0.0.1, private IP ranges), or restricts to allowed domains.Affected if The trigger.rb file does not contain strict URL validation - specifically no check for allowed schemes (https only) and no rejection of internal network addresses.
-
Check if webhooks are configuredExamine the Chatwoot configuration and database for any webhook endpoints that may be in use. Look at the webhooks table or configuration files for registered webhook URLs.Affected if Webhooks are configured and the trigger.rb lacks proper validation, meaning the SSRF vulnerability could be exploited through existing webhook configurations.
A user is affected if they run a Chatwoot installation where lib/webhooks/trigger.rb exists without proper URL validation and webhooks can be configured or are already in use.
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 and allowlisting for the webhook URL parameter to ensure only trusted destinations are permitted; consider upgrading to a patched version once available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-5205 — 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-2026-5205 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