CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-35587NVD status: Analyzed

glances: Server-Side Request Forgery

CVE-2026-35587 is a high-severity server-side request forgery vulnerability in glances from Nicolargo, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. Affected glances versions: < 4.5.4. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.4% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Check which version of glances you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Nicolargoglances< 4.5.4Not stated

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.

Scoring systemScoreSeverityScored by
CVSS 4.07.3HighCNA (github.com)
CVSS 3.18.8HighNVD

Official description

Glances is an open-source system cross-platform monitoring tool. Prior to version 4.5.4, a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the Glances IP plugin due to improper validation of the public_api configuration parameter. The value of public_api is used directly in outbound HTTP requests without any scheme restriction or hostname/IP validation. An attacker who can modify the Glances configuration can force the application to send requests to arbitrary internal or external endpoints. Additionally, when public_username and public_password are set, Glances automatically includes these credentials in the Authorization: Basic header, resulting in credential leakage to attacker-controlled servers. This vulnerability can be exploited to access internal network services, retrieve sensitive data from cloud metadata endpoints, and/or exfiltrate credentials via outbound HTTP requests. The issue arises because public_api is passed directly to the HTTP client (urlopen_auth) without validation, allowing unrestricted outbound connections and unintended disclosure of sensitive information. Version 4.5.4 contains a patch.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Server-Side Request Forgery

The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • If there is a known list of applications, IP, hostname, and/or domains to which the product is allowed to communicate, then use allowlists to ensure that outgoing requests are restricted to these known entities. The allowlists could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.
  • If the product is expected to be able to connect to arbitrary IP addresses or domains, consider using a denylist that includes private network addresses, internal domain names, etc. The denylist could be in the application code or possibly enforced by firewalls or network segmentation.

More Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerabilities (CWE-918)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Other vulnerabilities in glances

All glances vulnerabilities

Recent Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.