How severe is CVE-2026-43995?

No CVSS score has been assigned to CVE-2026-43995 yet. Review the advisory details and affected package list to assess your exposure.

Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-43995?

CVE-2026-43995 affects the following packages: flowise (npm), flowise-components (npm). Ecosystems affected: npm.

How do I fix CVE-2026-43995?

Update flowise to 3.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-43995 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect CVE-2026-43995 in my npm dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for flowise, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

How do I mitigate CVE-2026-43995 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

How does O3 Security protect against CVE-2026-43995?

O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-43995 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Is CVE-2026-43995 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for CVE-2026-43995 yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for CVE-2026-43995?

CVE-2026-43995 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.5%, placing it in the 39th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is CVE-2026-43995?

CVE-2026-43995 is classified as Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) (CWE-918). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation. This is a high-impact weakness class that often enables remote code execution or data exposure.

When was CVE-2026-43995 published, and has it been updated?

CVE-2026-43995 was published on May 11, 2026 and was last updated on August 12, 2026. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

📦 npm

Not in CISA KEV

CVE-2026-43995 — flowise

CVE-2026-43995 is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in flowise. A fix is available for flowise — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Flowise: SSRF Protection Bypass via Direct node-fetch / axios Usage (Patch Enforcement Failure)

Also known asGHSA-qqvm-66q4-vf5c

Published

May 11, 2026

Updated

Aug 12, 2026

Affected

2 pkgs

Patched

2 / 2

Exploits

None indexed

Exploitation data as of Sep 24, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-43995.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.5%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs39th percentile — riskier than 39% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

Real-World Exposure

2 pkgs affected

How broadly this vulnerability is actually deployed: weekly install volume shows current usage, and reverse-dependency count shows how many other packages break if it stays unpatched.

0other npm packages depend on this — each one inherits the vulnerability until it's patched upstream

flowisenpm

2Kdownloads / week

flowise-componentsnpm

4Kdownloads / week

Description

Summary

Flowise introduced SSRF protections through a centralized HTTP security wrapper (httpSecurity.ts) that implements deny-list validation and IP pinning logic.

However, multiple tool implementations directly import and invoke raw HTTP clients (node-fetch, axiosInstead of using the secured wrapper.

Because enforcement is neither mandatory nor centralized, these tools bypass SSRF mitigation entirely, restoring full SSRF capability even after the patch.

This issue is distinct from specification trust issues and represents incomplete mitigation of previously addressed SSRF vulnerabilities.

Details

Intended Security Model:

All outbound HTTP requests should pass through the centralized validation layer implemented in:

packages/components/src/httpSecurity.ts

This layer performs:

HTTP_DENY_LIST enforcement
IP resolution validation
IP pinning
Loopback blocking

Observed Implementation Gap:

Multiple tools bypass this layer and import HTTP libraries directly.

Examples include:

packages/components/nodes/tools/OpenAPIToolkit/OpenAPIToolkit.ts
packages/components/nodes/tools/WebScraperTool/WebScraperTool.ts
packages/components/nodes/tools/MCP/core.ts
packages/components/nodes/tools/Arxiv/core.ts

These files directly execute:

importfetchfrom'node-fetch'

or invoke axios without passing through the centralized validation wrapper.

Because there is no global interceptor or enforcement mechanism, outbound requests in these components are executed without SSRF validation.

This renders the mitigation introduced in GHSA-2x8m-83vc-6wv4 incomplete.

Root Cause

Security enforcement is not centralized.

Outbound request validation depends on voluntary usage of a wrapper function rather than being structurally enforced.

Because direct imports of HTTP clients are allowed, the mitigation is easily bypassed.

This is an architectural enforcement failure rather than a single implementation bug.

PoC

Even when an administrator configures:

HTTP_DENY_LIST=169.254.0.0/16,127.0.0.0/8

The following attack succeeds if a vulnerable tool is enabled:

Chat Prompt:

Use the Web Scraper tool to retrieve:
http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/

Execution flow:

The LLM triggers WebScraperTool.
The tool calls raw fetch() directly.
No httpSecurity.ts validation is applied.
The request reaches the metadata endpoint.
The response is returned to the chat context.

This demonstrates that SSRF protection is opt-in rather than enforced.

Impact

Severity: Critical (CVSS v3.1: 9.1 – AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N)

This issue:

Completely bypasses the centralized SSRF mitigation.
Allows access to internal network resources.
Enables the exploitation of cloud metadata and credential theft.
Invalidates the security assumptions of the recent patch.

Any deployment enabling affected tools remains vulnerable.

Recommended Remediation

Refactor all tools to use the centralized secureFetch() wrapper.
Add ESLint no-restricted-imports rules to prohibit the direct usage of node-fetch or axios in tool components.
Consider implementing a single internal HTTP client abstraction layer.
Apply network-level egress filtering as defense-in-depth.

Affected Packages

2 total 2 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
📦npm	`flowise`	all versions	3.1.0`npm install flowise@3.1.0`
📦npm	`flowise-components`	all versions	3.1.0`npm install flowise-components@3.1.0`

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for flowise, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update flowise to 3.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-43995 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-43995 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-43995. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary Flowise introduced SSRF protections through a centralized HTTP security wrapper (`httpSecurity.ts`) that implements deny-list validation and IP pinning logic. However, multiple tool implementations directly import and invoke raw HTTP clients (`node-fetch`, `axios`Instead of using the secured wrapper. Because enforcement is neither mandatory nor centralized, these tools bypass SSRF mitigation entirely, restoring full SSRF capability even after the patch. This issue is distinct from specification trust issues and represents incomplete mitigation of previously addressed SSRF vulne

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-43995 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-43995 across npm dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works