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

CVE-2026-7025

HIGH · 7.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-04-26
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
82/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges 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
A vulnerability was found in Typecho up to 1.3.0. This vulnerability affects the function Service::sendPingHandle of the file var/Widget/Service.php of the component Ping Back Service Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument X-Pingback/link results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could 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 confidence

Typecho up to version 1.3.0 contains a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in the pingback service endpoint. The vulnerability exists in the Service::sendPingHandle function in var/Widget/Service.php, where the X-Pingback HTTP header is not properly validated before being used to construct an outgoing request, allowing an attacker to make the server send requests to arbitrary internal or external resources.

MitigationImplement strict validation of the X-Pingback header value to ensure it contains only legitimate URLs, preferably restricting to allowed domains or disabling the pingback functionality entirely if not required. Consider deploying a WAF rule to filter malicious X-Pingback header patterns.

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
Unchanged
Confidentiality
Low
Integrity
Low
Availability
Low

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checks

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

  1. Identify Typecho installation
    Locate the Typecho installation by checking for the presence of common Typecho files such as 'config.inc.php' in the root directory, or 'var/Typecho/Common.php'. Use file system search or inspect the web root directory structure.
    Affected if Typecho is not present on the system, then the vulnerability does not apply.
  2. Determine installed Typecho version
    Open the file 'var/Typecho/Common.php' or check 'admin/index.php' for a version string. Compare the version number to the affected range (all versions up to and including 1.3.0).
    Affected if The installed version is 1.3.0 or any lower version number.
  3. Locate the vulnerable Service.php file
    Navigate to 'var/Widget/Service.php' in the Typecho installation directory. Verify the file exists and inspect the 'Service::sendPingHandle' function.
    Affected if The file var/Widget/Service.php exists and contains the sendPingHandle function.
  4. Verify pingback endpoint accessibility
    Send a test HTTP request to the pingback endpoint. This is typically the XML-RPC interface or a dedicated pingback route. Check the application routing configuration or attempt to access common pingback paths.
    Affected if The pingback service endpoint is accessible and responds to requests.
  5. Inspect X-Pingback header processing
    Review the code in var/Widget/Service.php around the sendPingHandle function. Look for code that reads the 'X-Pingback' HTTP header and passes it to a request function without validation.
    Affected if The code retrieves the X-Pingback header value and uses it in an outgoing request without proper URL validation or restriction.

A system is affected if it runs Typecho version 1.3.0 or lower, has the var/Widget/Service.php file with the sendPingHandle function, and processes the X-Pingback header in an outbound request without validation.

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.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement strict validation of the X-Pingback header value to ensure it contains only legitimate URLs, preferably restricting to allowed domains or disabling the pingback functionality entirely if not required. Consider deploying a WAF rule to filter malicious X-Pingback header patterns.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
11.0 hours of engineering $1,930
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-7025 — 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 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-2026-7025 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