Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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:XCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-5418 is a medium-severity SSRF (CWE-918) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 22th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
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-2026-5418 is a server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability affecting Appsmith, an open-source low-code platform developed by appsmithorg, in versions up to 1.97. The issue resides in the computeDisallowedHosts function within the file app/server/appsmith-interfaces/src/main/java/com/appsmith/util/WebClientUtils.java, part of the Dashboard component. This flaw, classified under CWE-918, has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L), indicating high severity due to its network accessibility and lack of prerequisites.
Remote attackers can exploit this vulnerability without authentication by manipulating the affected function to forge requests from the server. Successful exploitation enables limited impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability, such as unauthorized internal network access or probing of restricted resources. A public exploit is available, increasing the risk of widespread abuse.
Mitigation involves upgrading to Appsmith version 1.99, where the vendor has addressed the issue. The security advisory GHSA-9m89-5jw7-q5cr on GitHub provides detailed patch information, and the vendor was notified early, responding professionally with a rapid fix. Additional details are available via VulDB entries and the Appsmith repository.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-18518
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was identified in appsmithorg appsmith up to 1.97. Impacted is the function computeDisallowedHosts of the file app/server/appsmith-interfaces/src/main/java/com/appsmith/util/WebClientUtils.java of the component Dashboard. Such manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly…
more
available and might be used. Upgrading to version 1.99 is recommended to address this issue. The affected component should be upgraded. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.
- 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.