Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-31945 is a high-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability in Librechat Librechat. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 16th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
This vulnerability is AI-related — categorised as LLM Application Platforms; in the Supply Chain and Deployment risk domain.
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-2026-31945 is a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability affecting LibreChat, an open-source ChatGPT clone with additional features, specifically in versions 0.8.2-rc2 through 0.8.2. The issue arises when using agent actions or MCP, where a prior SSRF fix (GHSA-rgjq-4q58-m3q8) implemented only hostname validation without checking if DNS resolution yields a private IP address. This allows attackers to bypass protections and access internal resources, such as an internal RAG API or cloud instance metadata endpoints. The vulnerability is rated 7.7 on CVSS 3.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N) and maps to CWE-918.
An attacker with low privileges, such as an authenticated user, can exploit this over the network with low complexity and no user interaction required. By crafting requests through agent actions or MCP, they can force the server to make unauthorized connections to internal services, achieving high confidentiality impact across a changed scope. Potential outcomes include exfiltration of sensitive data from internal APIs or metadata services on cloud instances.
The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-f92m-jpv7-55p2) confirms the patch in version 0.8.3-rc1, which addresses the incomplete SSRF mitigation by adding private IP validation post-DNS resolution. Security practitioners should upgrade to 0.8.3-rc1 or later and review configurations for agent actions and MCP usage.
LibreChat's nature as an AI chatbot platform highlights relevance to AI/ML deployments, where SSRF could expose retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) components or related internal services. No public evidence of real-world exploitation is noted as of the CVE publication on 2026-03-27.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-16765
Vulnerability Data
LibreChat is a ChatGPT clone with additional features. Versions 0.8.2-rc2 through 0.8.2 are vulnerable to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) attack when using agent actions or MCP. Although a previous SSRF vulnerability (https://github.com/danny-avila/LibreChat/security/advisories/GHSA-rgjq-4q58-m3q8) was reported and patched, the fix only…
more
introduced hostname validation. It does not verify whether DNS resolution results in a private IP address. As a result, an attacker can still bypass the protection and gain access to internal resources, such as an internal RAG API or cloud instance metadata endpoints. Version 0.8.3-rc1 contains a patch.
- CWE(s)
AI Security AnalysisAI
- AI Category
- LLM Application Platforms
- Risk Domain
- Supply Chain and Deployment
- OWASP Top 10 for LLMs 2025
- None mapped
- Classification Reason
- Matched keywords: chatgpt, librechat, mcp
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.