Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-27888

SSRF in Apache Druid ≤ 31.0.2

SSRFXSSOpen Redirect
Published
20 March 2025
Modified
14 July 2025
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v4 5.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.017 74th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-27888 is a medium-severity Cross-site Scripting (CWE-79) vulnerability in Apache Druid. Its CVSS base score is 5.8 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Browser Session Hijacking (T1185); ranked in the top 26% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A01:2025 Broken Access ControlA05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Severity: medium (5.8) / important Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting'), URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect') vulnerability in Apache Druid. This issue affects all previous Druid versions. When using the…

more

Druid management proxy, a request that has a specially crafted URL could be used to redirect the request to an arbitrary server instead. This has the potential for XSS or XSRF. The user is required to be authenticated for this exploit. The management proxy is enabled in Druid's out-of-box configuration. It may be disabled to mitigate this vulnerability. If the management proxy is disabled, some web console features will not work properly, but core functionality is unaffected. Users are recommended to upgrade to Druid 31.0.2 or Druid 32.0.1, which fixes the issue.

CWE(s)
CWE-79CWE-601CWE-918

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1185 Browser Session Hijacking Collection
Adversaries may take advantage of security vulnerabilities and inherent functionality in browser software to change content, modify user-behaviors, and intercept information as part of various browser session hijacking techniques.
attack.mitre.org →
T1539 Steal Web Session Cookie Credential Access
An adversary may steal web application or service session cookies and use them to gain access to web applications or Internet services as an authenticated user without needing credentials.
attack.mitre.org →
T1659 Content Injection Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access and continuously communicate with victims by injecting malicious content into systems through online network traffic.
attack.mitre.org →
T1189 Drive-by Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may gain access to a system through a user visiting a website over the normal course of browsing.
attack.mitre.org →
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1566 Phishing Initial Access
Adversaries may send phishing messages to gain access to victim systems.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-29247Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-22849Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-28158Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2026-44598Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2026-58189Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-27347Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-29736Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-51441Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2024-36448Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2026-31910Same vendor: Apache

Affected Assets

apache
druid
≤ 31.0.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.7.2
  • V1.1.2
  • V1.3.2
  • V1.3.6

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement good match

Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing or incorrect input neutralization through targeted web-application tests.

SI-10 Information Input Validation good match

Input validation directly enforces neutralization of untrusted data before it reaches web output generation.

SI-15 Information Output Filtering good match

Output filtering can catch or sanitize unneutralized script content before it is served to users.

SC-7 Boundary Protection partial match

Boundary protection limits the network reach of server-initiated requests even if SSRF occurs.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly target introduction of XSS via coding standards/testing (mostly), yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors unaddressed (partial).

DE.CM-09 partial match
prevents

Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.

PR.IR-01 partial match
prevents

Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching and EOL replacement can remediate known XSS instances in libraries or frameworks (partial) but do nothing to enforce input neutralization in application code (none).

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Secure-coding testing and automated code-analysis tools are applied to detect improper neutralization of script-related content during web-page generation.

A.5.6 Contact with special interest groups partial match
prevents

Knowledge exchange on emerging attack techniques and patches reduces the likelihood that cross-site scripting flaws remain unaddressed in deployed applications.

A.5.7 Threat intelligence partial match
prevents

Operational indicators of compromise for web-application attacks can be incorporated into WAF or input-filtering rules, lowering the likelihood that unsanitized data reaches the browser.

A.8.23 Web filtering partial match
mitigates

Preventing access to attacker-controlled or malicious sites stops users from being redirected to untrusted locations via open-redirect or phishing links.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Requiring language-specific secure-coding standards and automated scanning during the SDLC catches missing output encoding or improper neutralization of untrusted data before the software reaches production.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure-coding standards, SAST scans and removal of insecure code samples together eliminate the failure to neutralize script content that produces cross-site scripting flaws.

References