MediumCVE-2026-28385

    SSRF via image import from URL allows internal network probing by authenticated users (CVE-2026-28385)

    Published Last modified Sources: CVE.org, Hersteller

    Share

    What is affected, what to do

    An exploit is publicly available. Update Canonical LXD to version 6.10.

    Affected
    • Canonical LXD lt 6.0..6.10
    Fixed in
    • Canonical LXD 6.10

    Not sure whether and how you are affected? Ask a question about this vulnerability

    Metrics

    5.0

    Priority

    XIEM Effective CVSS: highest available CVSS rating from NVD and vendor data.

    Source: NVD, CVSS v3

    5.0

    CVSS v3

    Severity Medium on the scale from 0 to 10.

    Source: CVE.org, Hersteller

    0.3 %

    EPSS score

    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.

    Source: FIRST EPSS, percentile 20.3

    Show all metrics
    Severity
    Medium
    Priority (0–325)

    The priority score is a consolidated metric that condenses several individual signals into a single, action-guiding ranking: technical severity (CVSS), exploitation likelihood (EPSS), known-exploited status (KEV) and the context of the affected asset. The aim is to answer the only truly important question in vulnerability management: what first?

    Read in glossary
    47.38 Methodology
    Exploit maturity

    An exploit is code or a technique that specifically uses a concrete vulnerability to force unintended behaviour — such as executing code or escalating privileges. It is the tool that turns a theoretical flaw into a practical attack.

    Read in glossary
    PoC (publicly reported)
    XIEM Effective CVSS

    XIEM® is the tiered managed-security operating model from NEOSEC and a registered trademark of NEOSEC GmbH. It extends classic SIEM — the central collection, normalisation and correlation of security-relevant events — with endpoint forensics, network visibility and deception technology, and consolidates them into three building tiers: Sentry, Orchestrate and Command.

    Read in glossary
    5.0 Methodology
    CVSS v3

    CVSS is the globally established, open standard for assessing the technical severity of a vulnerability on a scale from 0 to 10. It describes how easily a flaw can be exploited and what damage it can cause — but not how likely its actual exploitation is. CVSS and the complementary EPSS deliberately answer different questions.

    Read in glossary
    5.0
    EPSS score

    The EPSS score is the absolute model output for an individual vulnerability: the estimated probability of real-world exploitation within the next 30 days, expressed as a value between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0 % to 100 %). A score of 0.42 means „the model estimates a 42 % chance of real-world exploitation within 30 days“.

    Read in glossary
    0.3 %
    Low — model estimates < 1% exploitation likelihood.
    EPSS percentile

    The EPSS percentile is the relative position of a vulnerability within all EPSS-scored CVEs, expressed as a value between 0 and 1. A percentile of 0.90 means „this CVE has a higher EPSS score than 90 % of all other scored CVEs“. Unlike the EPSS score, it is not a probability — but a positioning within a ranking.

    Read in glossary
    20.3
    Elevated — this CVE ranks above at least 10% of all CVEs scored today.
    KEV status

    The KEV catalogue is a list maintained by the US authority CISA of vulnerabilities for which active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. It answers not the question „how severe?“ but „is it already being attacked?“ — thereby sharply prioritising patching.

    Read in glossary
    —
    Published
    CISA assessment (SSVC)
    Exploitation: none known · not automatable · Technical impact: partial
    Source: CISA Vulnrichment, as of 26 June 2026
    CWE

    CWE is a catalogue of typical weakness types in software and hardware — such as flawed input validation, unsafe memory handling or poor authentication. Where a CVE names a concrete vulnerability in a concrete product, a CWE describes the underlying class of defect.

    Read in glossary
    CWE-918

    Detection rules

    No NEOSEC detection rule is available for this vulnerability yet.

    Classification under NIS2 and CRA

    Rule-based classification from exploitation status and severity. It does not replace a case-by-case assessment.

    NIS2

    NIS2 is EU Directive (EU) 2022/2555 to raise the level of cybersecurity across the Union. It substantially broadens obligations compared with the first NIS directive: more sectors, mandatory risk management, staged reporting duties and personal accountability of senior management.

    Read in glossary
    Handle the vulnerability in regular vulnerability handling under Art. 21(2)(e) NIS2.
    CRA

    The CRA is EU Regulation (EU) 2024/2847 setting horizontal cybersecurity requirements for „products with digital elements“ — from industrial controllers and software to connected consumer devices. For the first time manufacturers must ensure security across the entire product lifecycle, handle vulnerabilities and provide security updates.

    Read in glossary
    From 11.12.2027, Annex I Part II CRA requires manufacturers of affected products with digital elements to handle vulnerabilities without delay and provide security updates.
    ISO/IEC 27001

    ISO/IEC 27001 is the internationally leading standard for an information security management system (ISMS). It describes a risk-based, process-oriented framework to systematically plan, implement, review and improve information security.

    Read in glossary
    Control A.8.8, management of technical vulnerabilities: assess relevance to your systems, plan remediation and keep evidence.

    Description

    Summary

    The LXD image import-from-URL endpoint (POST /1.0/images with source.type=url) makes server-side HTTP requests to an attacker-supplied URL without any private-IP or loopback blocking. An authenticated user with the can_create_images entitlement can force the LXD daemon to connect to internal network addresses (127.0.0.1, RFC1918 ranges, cloud metadata endpoints), enabling port scanning via error-based inference and interaction with internal HTTP services from the daemon's privileged network position.

    Severity

    • Attack Vector: Network — LXD API is network-accessible.
    • Attack Complexity: Low — Single crafted API request with no special conditions.
    • Privileges Required: Low — Requires can_create_images entitlement, a non-admin permission commonly delegated to regular users.
    • User Interaction: None.
    • Scope: Changed — The attacker leverages LXD's privileged network position to probe and interact with internal services that are outside the attacker's direct network access and outside the scope of LXD's image management authorization.
    • Confidentiality Impact: Low — Error messages reveal internal port states (open/closed/filtered) and service availability. Response bodies from internal services are NOT returned to the attacker (hash validation blocks content exfiltration).
    • Integrity Impact: None — No demonstrated ability to modify data on internal services.
    • Availability Impact: None — No meaningful resource exhaustion or denial of service.

    Affected Component

    • lxd/images.go — imgPostURLInfo (lines 668–755) — Makes HEAD request to user-supplied URL without any SSRF protections.
    • lxd/util/http.go — HTTPClient (lines 102–147) — Creates HTTP client with no IP blocking or URL validation.
    • shared/network.go — RFC3493Dialer (lines 20–49) — Dials arbitrary hosts including private/loopback ranges.
    • lxd/daemon_images.go — ImageDownload (lines 478–510, "direct" case) — Makes GET request to URL from attacker-controlled response header.

    Description

    Core vulnerability: no SSRF protections on server-side image fetching

    When a user imports an image from a URL, the imgPostURLInfo function makes an HTTP HEAD request directly to the user-supplied URL with zero validation:

    // lxd/images.go:668-703
    func imgPostURLInfo(ctx context.Context, s *state.State, req api.ImagesPost, ...) (*api.Image, error) {
        if req.Source.URL == "" {
            return nil, errors.New("Missing URL")
        }
    
        myhttp, err := util.HTTPClient("", s.Proxy)
        // ...
    
        // Resolve the image URL
        head, err := http.NewRequest("HEAD", req.Source.URL, nil)
        // No URL validation, no scheme check, no IP range check
        // ...
    
        raw, err := myhttp.Do(head)  // Makes request to arbitrary destination
    

    The HTTP client is created via util.HTTPClient which uses shared.RFC3493Dialer — a standard dialer with zero private-IP filtering:

    // shared/network.go:20-49
    func RFC3493Dialer(context context.Context, network string, address string) (net.Conn, error) {
        host, port, err := net.SplitHostPort(address)
        // ...
        addrs, err := net.LookupHost(host)
        // ...
        for _, a := range addrs {
            c, err := net.DialTimeout(network, net.JoinHostPort(a, port), 10*time.Second)
            // No check: IsLoopback? IsPrivate? IsLinkLocalUnicast?
            // Connects to ANY resolved address including 127.0.0.1, 10.x.x.x, 169.254.169.254
    

    The HTTP client also follows redirects unconditionally:

    // lxd/util/http.go:139-144
    myhttp.CheckRedirect = func(req *http.Request, via []*http.Request) error {
        // Replicate the headers
        req.Header = via[len(via)-1].Header
        return nil  // Always follows redirects — no destination validation
    }
    

    No SSRF protections exist anywhere in the codebase

    An exhaustive search for private-IP checks (IsLoopback, IsPrivate, IsLinkLocalUnicast), URL allowlists, or SSRF-specific protections found zero results in any HTTP client or outbound request path. The codebase has no SSRF defense infrastructure.

    Chained SSRF via LXD-Image-URL response header

    After the HEAD request, the LXD-Image-URL response header is used as the target for a second HTTP GET request, creating a chained SSRF:

    // lxd/images.go:705-725
    hash := raw.Header.Get("LXD-Image-Hash")  // Attacker controls this
    url := raw.Header.Get("LXD-Image-URL")    // Attacker controls this
    
    info, err := ImageDownload(ctx, s, op, &ImageDownloadArgs{
        Server:   url,       // Attacker-controlled URL from response header
        Protocol: "direct",  // Forces unprotected direct HTTP GET
        Alias:    hash,      // Attacker-controlled hash
        // ...
    })
    

    In ImageDownload, the "direct" case makes a GET to the attacker-controlled URL:

    // lxd/daemon_images.go:478-510
    case "direct":
        httpClient, err := util.HTTPClient(args.Certificate, s.Proxy)
        // ...
        req, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodGet, args.Server, nil)  // args.Server = attacker URL
        // ...
        raw, doneCh, err := cancel.CancelableDownload(canceler, httpClient.Do, req)
    

    This means an attacker who controls the HEAD target can redirect the second GET request to any internal service. The response body is downloaded to disk but hash validation prevents the attacker from reading it:

    // lxd/daemon_images.go:541-544
    result := hex.EncodeToString(sha256.Sum(nil))
    if result != fp {
        return nil, fmt.Errorf("Hash mismatch for %q: %s != %s", args.Server, result, fp)
    }
    

    Error observability enables port scanning

    Errors from the outbound request propagate back to the caller via the operation result:

    // lxd/operations/operations.go:612-614
    if op.err != nil {
        retOp.Err = response.SmartError(op.err).String()
    }
    

    The error messages differ based on the target's state:

    • Port open: "Missing LXD-Image-Hash header" (HEAD succeeded, response had no expected headers)
    • Port closed: "connection refused" (connection rejected immediately)
    • Port filtered/host unreachable: "context deadline exceeded" / "no route to host" (timeout or routing error)

    These differences allow systematic port scanning of internal networks from the LXD daemon's network position.

    Execution chain

    1. Attacker sends POST /1.0/images with {"source":{"type":"url","url":"http://127.0.0.1:6379/"}}
    2. imagesPost handler verifies can_create_images entitlement (line 1163)
    3. Background operation calls imgPostURLInfo (line 1361)
    4. imgPostURLInfo creates HTTP client via util.HTTPClient — no SSRF protections (line 675)
    5. HEAD request to http://127.0.0.1:6379/ — no IP validation (line 700)
    6. RFC3493Dialer resolves 127.0.0.1 and dials it — no private-IP check (line 33)
    7. Error or response propagated back via operation (line 612-614 in operations.go)
    8. Attacker queries operation result via GET /1.0/operations/{id}/wait and reads the error message

    For chained SSRF:

    1. Attacker points source.url to their own server
    2. Their server responds with LXD-Image-Hash: <any> and LXD-Image-URL: http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/
    3. LXD makes GET to http://169.254.169.254/... (line 493 in daemon_images.go)
    4. Response body downloaded but hash validation prevents content exfiltration
    5. Error messages still reveal whether the internal service responded (200 vs error)

    Proof of Concept

    # Safe PoC: force daemon to connect to loopback port 1 (closed port).
    # Error message will confirm server-side request occurred.
    SOCK=/var/lib/lxd/unix.socket
    
    # Create the operation
    OP=$(curl -s --unix-socket "$SOCK" \
      -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
      -X POST http://localhost/1.0/images \
      -d '{"source":{"type":"url","url":"http://127.0.0.1:1/"}}' \
      | sed -n 's/.*"operation":"\([^"]*\)".*/\1/p')
    
    # Wait for result — expect "connection refused" confirming SSRF
    curl -s --unix-socket "$SOCK" "http://localhost${OP}/wait"
    # Response will contain error with "connection refused"
    

    Source: NVD (NIST), cvelistv5, GitHub Security Advisories

    Affected products

    The following versions are affected. Older releases of the same product line are also vulnerable unless stated otherwise.

    Affected products
    Affected versionsFixed in
    Canonicallxd
    • 6.0 – < 6.10
    • 6.10
    canonicallxd
    • 4.12 – ≤ 6.9
    • —
    gogithub.com/canonical/lxd
    • < 0.0.0-20261005133302-c4a919f3f4e2
    • 0.0.0-20261005133302-c4a919f3f4e2

    Vendors and products

    Weakness classes (CWE)

    • CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

      Base

      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.

      Entry at MITRE CWE-918

    Public exploit references

    Publicly reported proof-of-concepts, exploit modules and detection templates for this vulnerability. NEOSEC links to the original sources only and does not provide any exploit code.

    Public exploit references
    Reference tagged as exploitgithub.com (opens in a new tab)PoC (publicly reported)reported, not verified—

    References & sources

    • github.comSSRF via image import from URL allows internal network probing by authenticated usersVulnerability database, Vendor advisory, Exploit, Vendor advisory, Mitigation
    • github.comdoc: update guide to hardening security for LXDPatch, Issue tracking, Issue tracking, Patch

    Changes to this CVE

    Who changed this CVE and when: NVD (analysis, affected products, CVSS), the CVE publisher (CNA) and additional providers such as CISA (ADP).

    One NVD translation into another language is hidden.

    Embed badge

    Show the severity and KEV status of this vulnerability on your site – with a link back here. The image is updated hourly.

    Badge preview for CVE-2026-28385
    <a href="https://intel.neosec.eu/en/cve/CVE-2026-28385"><img src="https://intel.neosec.eu/badge/cve/CVE-2026-28385.svg?lang=en" alt="CVE-2026-28385 – NEOSEC Intel" height="20"></a>