Skip to content

CVE-2026-24779

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF): Is CVE-2026-24779 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

☆ Watch

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.1 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.5%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:L

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to version 0.14.1, a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the `MediaConnector` class within the vLLM project's multimodal feature set. The load_from_url and load_from_url_async methods obtain and process media from URLs provided by users, using different Python parsing libraries when restricting the target host. These two parsing libraries have different interpretations of backslashes, which allows the host name restriction to be bypassed. This allows an attacker to coerce the vLLM server into making arbitrary requests to internal network resources. This vulnerability is particularly critical in containerized environments like `llm-d`, where a compromised vLLM pod could be used to scan the internal network, interact with other pods, and potentially cause denial of service or access sensitive data. For example, an attacker could make the vLLM pod send malicious requests to an internal `llm-d` management endpoint, leading to system instability by falsely reporting metrics like the KV cache state. Version 0.14.1 contains a patch for the issue.

References

NVD MITRE CVE.org

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-24779
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-24779/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-24779)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-24779"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-24779/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-24779"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Related CVEs

    Same weakness: CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF).