Skip to content

Craft CMS: Blind SSRF and Arbitrary JavaScript Injection via Host Header Poisoning in actionResourceJs

Critical severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jun 16, 2026 in craftcms/cms • Updated Jun 19, 2026

Package

composer craftcms/cms (Composer)

Affected versions

>= 5.0.0-RC1, < 5.10
>= 4.0.0-RC1, < 4.18

Patched versions

5.10
4.18

Description

1. Overview

Craft CMS is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) and Arbitrary JavaScript Injection through the /actions/app/resource-js endpoint. By exploiting the default permissive trustedHosts configuration, an attacker can poison the Host or X-Forwarded-Host header to manipulate the application’s $baseUrl. This bypasses the endpoint’s internal URL validation, forcing the backend Guzzle client to fetch a malicious payload from an attacker-controlled server and reflect it to the client with a Content-Type: application/javascript header.

2. Vulnerability Mechanism (Root Cause)
The vulnerability manifests when assetManager.cacheSourcePaths is set to false. The attack chain relies on three structural flaws and insecure defaults:

  • A. Default Proxy Trust (trustedHosts): Craft’s default GeneralConfig::$trustedHosts is set to ['any']. This allows an attacker to bypass front-end web server (Nginx/Apache) strict Host header validations by simply injecting an X-Forwarded-Host header. Yii2 will parse this and globally set $baseUrl to the attacker's domain.
  • B. Insecure HTTP Client (actionResourceJs): In AppController::actionResourceJs(), the str_starts_with($url, $baseUrl) validation is bypassed because $baseUrl is already poisoned by the attacker. The core then uses Craft::createGuzzleClient()->get($url). Unlike the GraphQL Asset fetcher, this Guzzle instance defaults to ALLOW_REDIRECTS => true.
  • C. Forced JS Content-Type: The response fetched from the attacker's server is blindly returned to the user via $this->asRaw() with the header Content-Type: application/javascript.

3. Attack Scenario & Impact (Proof of Exploitability)
This endpoint acts as a proxy, taking remote, unverified content and serving it as valid JavaScript. While the direct SSRF allows for internal network probing, the most devastating impact occurs when caching layers are involved.

If the Craft CMS instance is behind a caching layer, this vulnerability leads directly to Web Cache Poisoning:

  1. An unauthenticated attacker sends the poisoned request.
  2. The caching layer caches the malicious JavaScript response for the legitimate /actions/app/resource-js URI.
  3. When an authenticated Administrator logs into the Control Panel, their browser loads the poisoned cached JavaScript (Stored XSS).
  4. The malicious script extracts window.Craft.csrfTokenValue and silently sends a POST request to /admin/actions/plugins/install-plugin, achieving 1-Click Remote Code Execution (RCE) via Session Riding.

References

@angrybrad angrybrad published to craftcms/cms Jun 16, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 19, 2026
Reviewed Jun 19, 2026
Last updated Jun 19, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality Low
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Weaknesses

Origin Validation Error

The product does not properly verify that the source of data or communication is valid. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-55791

GHSA ID

GHSA-c55v-343g-5xff

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.