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

CVE-2026-53446

MEDIUM · 6.2 CVSS v4.0 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 →

68/100

Remediation priority · Elevated

Remotely reachable Zero-click 5 weeks old

Official description

NVD · unedited

Wekan is open source kanban built with Meteor. Prior to 9.32, Wekan webhook integration URLs in models/integrations.js are stored from user input and later fetched by server/notifications/outgoing.js without applying the existing validateAttachmentUrl() private-network checks from models/lib/attachmentUrlValidation.js. A board administrator can configure webhook URLs that cause server-side requests to internal or metadata services. This issue is fixed in version 9.32.

Technical summary

dbcve analysis · high confidence

This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Wekan's webhook integration. Webhook URLs provided by board administrators are stored from user input and later fetched by server/notifications/outgoing.js without applying the existing validateAttachmentUrl() private-network checks from models/lib/attachmentUrlValidation.js. This allows attackers to configure webhook URLs that cause the server to make requests to internal or metadata services.

MitigationUpgrade to Wekan version 9.32 or later, which applies the validateAttachmentUrl() private-network validation to webhook integration URLs.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS breakdown

From the vector

Attack vector: Network
Complexity: Low
Privileges: High
Authentication: X
User interaction: None
Scope: X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

Am I affected?

dbcve checks

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

Identify installed Wekan version

Check your Wekan version in the UI (Settings > About) or via the API/command line. Compare against the fixed version 9.32.

Affected if Running Wekan version 9.31 or earlier
Determine if webhook integration is configured

Navigate to a board where you have admin rights, then go to Board > Settings > Outgoing Webhooks. Inspect whether any webhook URLs are defined.

Affected if Webhook URLs are configured and the server version is below 9.32
Verify webhook URL destinations are not restricted

Review any configured outgoing webhook URLs in the board settings. Check if URLs point to internal IP addresses, localhost, or private network ranges (e.g., 10.x.x.x, 192.168.x.x, 127.0.0.1).

Affected if Webhook URLs can be set to arbitrary destinations and the server is below version 9.32
Inspect server code for validateAttachmentUrl usage

Examine the file server/notifications/outgoing.js in your Wekan installation. Search for calls to validateAttachmentUrl or attachmentUrlValidation functions.

Affected if The validateAttachmentUrl check from models/lib/attachmentUrlValidation.js is not being invoked before fetching webhook URLs

You are affected if running Wekan version 9.31 or earlier and any outgoing webhooks with user-controllable URLs are configured in your board settings.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Remediation

dbcve · scoped

Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime

Mitigation

Upgrade to Wekan version 9.32 or later, which applies the validateAttachmentUrl() private-network validation to webhook integration URLs.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

9.32

Upgrade Wekan to version 9.32 or later to resolve the SSRF vulnerability in webhook integration URLs
After upgrading, verify that webhook URLs are properly validated against private network checks
Confirm that the validateAttachmentUrl() function from models/lib/attachmentUrlValidation.js is now applied to webhook URLs in server/notifications/outgoing.js

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

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory

Consultation2.0 h
Implementation4.0 h
Testing6.0 h
Review / QA3.0 h

15.0 hours of engineering $2,560

Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,096.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally

dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-53446 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-53446 in production — separate from our analysis above.

Notes0 Guidelines

Know something about CVE-2026-53446?

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.

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

At a glance

A fix existsA vendor remedy is published

Severity 6.2 Medium

Exploit likelihood EPSS, next 30 days 0.3%

Remediation

Need this fixed?

Have this fixed 15 hrs · Moderate

Typical engagement from $2,560

Get a fix See the full breakdown ↓

We specialise in CVE remediation. Send your environment and we’ll scope CVE-2026-53446 and return a fixed quote.

You’ll deal with our team directly and deploy the reviewed fix to staging first — never straight to production.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Check your environment

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.

Scan for this in your stack

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Practitioner notes

No notes yet

Official description

Technical summary

CVSS breakdown

Am I affected?

Remediation

References