#ssrf

### Summary A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability is present in applications utilizing the `google-translate-api-browser` package and exposing the `translateOptions` to the end user. An attacker can set a malicious `tld`, causing the application to return unsafe URLs pointing towards local resources. ### Details The `translateOptions.tld` field is not properly sanitized before being placed in the Google translate URL. This can allow an attacker with control over the `translateOptions` to set the `tld` to a payload such as `@127.0.0.1`. This causes the full URL to become `https://translate.google.@127.0.0.1/...`, where `translate.google.` is the username used to connect to localhost. ### PoC Imagine a server running the following code (closely mimicking the code present in the package's README): ```javascript const express = require('express'); const { generateRequestUrl, normaliseResponse } = require('google-translate-api-browser'); const https = require('https'); const...

The WPB Show Core WordPress plugin through 2.2 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF) via the `path` parameter.

google-translate-api-browser is an npm package which interfaces with the google translate web api. A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerability is present in applications utilizing the `google-translate-api-browser` package and exposing the `translateOptions` to the end user. An attacker can set a malicious `tld`, causing the application to return unsafe URLs pointing towards local resources. The `translateOptions.tld` field is not properly sanitized before being placed in the Google translate URL. This can allow an attacker with control over the `translateOptions` to set the `tld` to a payload such as `@127.0.0.1`. This causes the full URL to become `https://translate.google.@127.0.0.1/...`, where `translate.google.` is the username used to connect to localhost. An attacker can send requests within internal networks and the local host. Should any HTTPS application be present on the internal network with a vulnerability exploitable via a GET call, then it would be possible to exp...

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Darren Cooney Instant Images plugin <= 5.1.0.2 versions.

Ambitious Employees Tout New AI Tools, Ignore Serious SaaS Security RisksLike the SaaS shadow IT of the past, AI is placing CISOs and cybersecurity teams in a tough but familiar spot.  Employees are covertly using AI with little regard for established IT and cybersecurity review procedures. Considering ChatGPT’s meteoric rise to 100 million users within 60 days of launch, especially with little

Nextcloud Mail is the mail app for Nextcloud, a self-hosted productivity platform. Starting in version 1.13.0 and prior to version 2.2.8 and 3.3.0, an attacker can use an unprotected endpoint in the Mail app to perform a SSRF attack. Nextcloud Mail app versions 2.2.8 and 3.3.0 contain a patch for this issue. As a workaround, disable the mail app.

Nextcloud Server provides data storage for Nextcloud, an open source cloud platform. Starting in version 25.0.0 and prior to versions 25.0.11, 26.0.6, and 27.1.0 of Nextcloud Server and starting in version 22.0.0 and prior to versions 22.2.10.16, 23.0.12.11, 24.0.12.7, 25.0.11, 26.0.6, and 27.1.0 of Nextcloud Enterprise Server, the DNS pin middleware was vulnerable to DNS rebinding allowing an attacker to perform SSRF as a final result. Nextcloud Server 25.0.11, 26.0.6, and 27.1.0 and Nextcloud Enterprise Server 22.2.10.16, 23.0.12.11, 24.0.12.7, 25.0.11, 26.0.6, and 27.1.0 contain patches for this issue. No known workarounds are available.

The ransomware strain known as Play is now being offered to other threat actors "as a service," new evidence unearthed by Adlumin has revealed. "The unusual lack of even small variations between attacks suggests that they are being carried out by affiliates who have purchased the ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) and are following step-by-step instructions from playbooks delivered with it," the

Book Stack version 23.10.2 allows filtering local files on the server. This is possible because the application is vulnerable to SSRF.

### Impact The rendered diff in XWiki embeds images to be able to compare the contents and not display a difference for an actually unchanged image. For this, XWiki requests all embedded images on the server side. These requests are also sent for images from other domains and include all cookies that were sent in the original request to ensure that images with restricted view right can be compared. This allows an attacker to steal login and session cookies that allow impersonating the current user who views the diff. The attack can be triggered with an image that references the rendered diff, thus making it easy to trigger. More concretely, to reproduce, add 101 different images with references to the attacker's server. In any place add an image with a reference to `/xwiki/bin/view/Image%20Cookie%20Test/?xpage=changes&rev1=1.1&rev2=2.1&include=renderedChanges` where `Image%20Cookie%20Test` needs to be replaced by the path to the document with the images and the two revisions should ma...