Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-27829 is a medium-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Astro \@Astrojs\/Node. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 20th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2026-27829 is a vulnerability in the Astro web framework, affecting versions 9.0.0 through 9.5.3. The issue resides in Astro's image pipeline, where the `inferSize` option fetches remote images at render time to determine their dimensions without performing domain validation. This allows bypassing the `image.domains` or `image.remotePatterns` restrictions that developers configure to limit fetches to authorized hosts only.
An attacker who can influence the image URL—such as through CMS content or user-supplied data—can exploit this to force the Astro server to fetch content from arbitrary remote hosts. This enables server-side request forgery (SSRF), including against internal network services or cloud metadata endpoints, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 6.5 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L) and mapping to CWE-918.
The Astro security advisory (GHSA-cj9f-h6r6-4cx2) and corresponding commit (e01e98b063e90d274c42130ec2a60cc0966622c9) confirm that upgrading to version 9.5.4 resolves the issue by enforcing domain validation during `inferSize` fetches.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-8785
Vulnerability Data
Astro is a web framework. In versions 9.0.0 through 9.5.3, a bug in Astro's image pipeline allows bypassing `image.domains` / `image.remotePatterns` restrictions, enabling the server to fetch content from unauthorized remote hosts. Astro provides an `inferSize` option that fetches remote…
more
images at render time to determine their dimensions. Remote image fetches are intended to be restricted to domains the site developer has manually authorized (using the `image.domains` or `image.remotePatterns` options). However, when `inferSize` is used, no domain validation is performed — the image is fetched from any host regardless of the configured restrictions. An attacker who can influence the image URL (e.g., via CMS content or user-supplied data) can cause the server to fetch from arbitrary hosts. This allows bypassing `image.domains` / `image.remotePatterns` restrictions to make server-side requests to unauthorized hosts. This includes the risk of server-side request forgery (SSRF) against internal network services and cloud metadata endpoints. Version 9.5.4 fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.3.6V1.5.3V5.3.2V10.4.7
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Information flow enforcement can restrict which destinations the server is allowed to contact on behalf of users.
Input validation directly stops untrusted URLs from being accepted and fetched without destination checks.
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.
Secure development practices directly include input validation and destination allow-listing that prevent SSRF.
Runtime monitoring of web applications and services can detect anomalous outbound requests indicative of SSRF.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record SSRF flaws in web applications.
Network segmentation and egress controls can limit the damage from successful SSRF requests.
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.
Operational threat data describing SSRF campaigns can be used to tighten outbound-request allow-lists and detection rules before attackers exploit them.