dify: Server-Side Request Forgery
CVE-2026-58141 is a high-severity server-side request forgery vulnerability in dify from LangGenius, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.6 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. The record lists version 1.15.0 as the first without the flaw, so updating dify to that release or later removes the exposure. 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.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update dify to 1.15.0 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Langgenius | dify | 0.6.0 up to, but not including, 1.15.0 | 1.15.0 |
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
- LowLimited modification of data is possible.
- Availability
- LowPerformance or availability is reduced.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L. Scored by CNA (vulncheck.com).
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 7.2 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.6 | High | CNA (vulncheck.com) |
Official description
Dify before 1.15.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows any authenticated console user to bypass SSRF protections and issue arbitrary HTTP requests to internal services and cloud metadata endpoints due to the Squid proxy configuration only defining source ACLs without destination deny rules and the make_request() helper performing no independent destination IP validation. Attackers can use endpoints such as GET /console/api/remote-files/<url>, POST /console/api/remote-files/upload, the HTTP Request workflow node, website crawl, or document import from URL to reach internal components like the sandbox, internal APIs, and PostgreSQL, and on AWS deployments read IAM credentials from the instance metadata service, with the HTTP Request node further enabling POST, PUT, and DELETE writes to internal services relying on network isolation for authorization.
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.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other vulnerabilities in dify
- 8.3 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 9.4 Critical severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
Recent Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerabilities
- 9.1 Critical severity
- 7.0 High severity
- 10.0 Critical severity
- 8.2 High severity
- 8.5 High severity
- 9.1 Critical severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.