CVE-2026-114076
mediumpriority · track · 22EPSS 0.002 · 14 %ileUSEPSS · scored 2026-10-27
Trigger.dev before 4.5.2 contains a blind server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows authenticated tenants to make the webapp server send POST requests to internal hosts by setting an unvalidated webhook alert channel URL. Attackers can point the webhook at internal services or cloud metadata addresses and trigger alerts to scan internal hosts, send state-changing POSTs, or reach IMDSv1 via redirects.
cvss
Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.
base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · low–medium · 1.3–5.4
weaknesses
The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.
affected products (1)
Products and version ranges known to be affected.
advisories (1)
Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.
- GHSA-q567-cr4x-96w4Trigger.dev: Blind SSRF via alert-channel webhook2026-10-02ghsa · osvUS
### Summary A WEBHOOK alert channel stores a user-supplied `url`. When an alert fires (deployment/run failure, error groups), the webapp server (`alertsWorker` -> `DeliverAlertService`) POSTs the HMAC-signed alert payload to that URL via `fetch(webhook.url, ...)`. The URL is never validated against a host allowlist or private-IP/metadata blocklist (a repo-wide search for `169.254`, `isPrivate`, `isLoopback`, `net.isIP`, `ssrf` returns ZERO hits), and the API route's URL field is just `z.string().optional()` (no syntax check at all). So an authenticated tenant can point the webhook at internal infrastructure or `169.254.169.254` and the multi-tenant server fetches it. ### Affected `apps/webapp`, HEAD `5d99457` (current main). ### Root cause - Source (API route): `app/presenters/v3/ApiAlertChannelPresenter.server.ts` `ApiAlertChannelData.url = z.string().optional()` (no host validation); route `app/routes/api.v1.projects.$projectRef.alertChannels.ts` (PAT-auth). - Store: `app/v3/services/alerts/createAlertChannel.server.ts` persists `{url, secret, version}` verbatim. - Sink: `app/v3/services/alerts/deliverAlert.server.ts:973` `fetch(webhook.url, {method:"POST", headers:{"x-trigger-signature-hmacsha256":...}, body:rawPayload})`; identical at `deliverErrorGroupAlert.server.ts:258`. Runs inside the webapp process; `fetch` follows redirects (IMDSv1-via-redirect). No egress guard anywhere. ### Runtime PoC (proven on self-host) Seeded a project + STAGING env + a WEBHOOK channel with `url=http://host.docker.internal:7766/...` (an internal address from the server's POV) + a DEPLOYING deployment. Triggered via the public API `POST /api/v1/deployments/deployment_ssrfpoc/fail` -> 200 -> FAILED -> alertsWorker -> the server fetched the listener. Captured: ``` POST /ssrf-via-webhook HTTP/1.1 host: host.docker.internal:7766 x-trigger-signature-hmacsha256: <redacted> user-agent: node {"type":"alert.deployment.failed", ...} ``` The webapp server (user-agent: node) made an outbound POST to the attacker-chosen internal URL; 169.254.169.254 / any internal host works identically. ### Severity `CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N` ~ Medium. Blind (response not reflected) + POST-only (fixed body = signed alert payload), so it enables internal port/host scanning (delivery success/timing oracle), state-changing POSTs to internal services, and IMDSv1-via-redirect — not arbitrary GET exfiltration. PR:L (authenticated tenant). Egress private-IP/metadata blocking on server-issued webhooks is industry standard; its absence is the defect. ### Suggested fix Validate the webhook URL on create (require http(s), resolve host, reject private/link-local/loopback/metadata ranges) AND re-check at fetch time (re-resolve after redirects or disable redirects / pin to resolved public IP). A shared `assertPublicUrl(url)` used by `createAlertChannel` + the two delivery sinks. ### Dup Distinct CWE-918 class from the IDOR advisories. FRESH. (The Grav maintainer independently hardened the same webhook-URL-SSRF class in grav-plugin-api commit dfcc947 on 2026-06-26 — corroborating the class is real and fixable.)
sources
Which sources assert this record, and when.
references (2) nvd
External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.
Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.
Free scan