Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐹
🐹 Go
Not in CISA KEV
MEDIUM severity

CVE-2026-53521 — nezha

MEDIUM

CVE-2026-53521 is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.4) CWE-863 vulnerability in github.com/nezhahq/nezha. A fix is available for github.com/nezhahq/nezha — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Nezha Monitoring: Stored future DDNS profile ID allows unauthorized use of another user's DDNS profile context

Also known asGHSA-39g2-8x68-pmx8GO-2026-5826
Published
Jun 12, 2026
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 23, 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-2026-53521.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.2%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs14th percentile — riskier than 14% 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.

How urgent is this, really

CVE-2026-53521 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐹github.com/nezhahq/nezha

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

PATCH /server/{id} accepts and persists nonexistent ddns_profiles IDs for a member-owned server. If another user later creates a DDNS profile with one of those IDs, the DDNS worker resolves the stored ID and dispatches an update using the other user's DDNS profile configuration in the context of the attacker's server.

This is a second-order authorization bypass: direct binding to an existing foreign DDNS profile is correctly denied, but an unresolved future ID can be stored first and later becomes a live cross-user reference.

Affected versions

Confirmed on:

  • Nezha v2.0.14
  • Commit: 8b5e382fe217107c7b777ea9c6b4bc3d2e156202

The exact affected version range was not determined.

Impact

A normal member who owns a server can prebind one or more future DDNS profile IDs to that server. If another user later creates a DDNS profile with a matching ID, the dashboard DDNS worker can use the victim's DDNS profile/provider configuration for the attacker's server.

In the validated worker path, the dispatched DDNS update combines:

  • the victim DDNS profile ID and owner
  • the victim profile's provider type
  • victim profile fields such as domains, access ID, access secret, and retry policy
  • attacker server context, including the attacker's server ID, owner, IPv4 address, and override DDNS domains

This can result in unauthorized DDNS update attempts using another user's DDNS profile context. The attacker does not need permission to bind the victim profile after it exists.

The following were not validated: credential disclosure, account takeover, or guaranteed external DNS modification across all providers. The credentials remain server-side in the worker path. The downstream DNS impact depends on the victim profile's provider configuration and what that provider account is authorized to update.

Affected components

  • PATCH /server/{id}
  • cmd/dashboard/controller/server.go
  • service/singleton/singleton.go
  • service/singleton/ddns.go
  • service/singleton/server.go
  • pkg/ddns/ddns.go

Root cause

The server update path validates submitted DDNS profile IDs through CheckPermission, but that check only rejects existing objects owned by another user. Nonexistent IDs are skipped.

The updateServer path then persists the submitted raw IDs into DDNSProfilesRaw, along with override domain data. Later, the DDNS worker resolves the stored profile IDs by ID and dispatches provider updates without revalidating that the resolved profiles belong to the server owner.

As a result, an invalid unresolved reference can become a valid cross-user reference after another user creates a DDNS profile with the same global auto-increment ID.

Reproduction summary

The behavior was validated locally with focused regression tests.

Controller chain proof

Test file:

cmd/dashboard/controller/ddns_second_order_test.go

Test name:

TestUpdateServerAllowsFutureDDNSProfileBindingThenResolvesVictimProfile

Command:

go test ./cmd/dashboard/controller -run TestUpdateServerAllowsFutureDDNSProfileBindingThenResolvesVictimProfile -count=1

Result:

pass

The test demonstrates:

  1. A normal member owns server 1.
  2. DDNS profile ID 1 does not exist.
  3. The member updates their server with enable_ddns=true and ddns_profiles=[1].
  4. The request succeeds.
  5. The server persists DDNSProfiles=[1].
  6. Another user later creates a DDNS profile and receives ID 1.
  7. A fresh attempt by the attacker to bind profile 1 is correctly denied.
  8. The previously stored reference remains active and resolves in the DDNS worker path.

Provider-level worker proof

Test file:

service/singleton/ddns_worker_authz_test.go

Test name:

TestUpdateDDNSDispatchesVictimProfileForAttackerServer

Command:

go test ./service/singleton -run TestUpdateDDNSDispatchesVictimProfileForAttackerServer -count=1

Result:

pass

The test proves that the DDNS worker does not merely resolve the victim profile. It dispatches a DDNS update using the victim profile configuration and attacker server context.

Validated assertions include:

  • resolved profile ID is 1
  • resolved profile owner is victim user 200
  • processed server is attacker server 1 owned by user 100
  • provider type is the victim profile's provider
  • victim profile fields are present in worker dispatch:
    • domains
    • access ID
    • access secret
    • max retries
  • attacker server context is present in the same dispatch:
    • IPv4 198.51.100.44
  • attacker-controlled override domains are passed to the worker:
    • attacker-controlled.example

Practicality

The attack requires predicting or prebinding future DDNS profile IDs. This limits severity, but does not remove the authorization issue.

Evidence supporting practicality:

  • DDNS profile IDs are uint64 GORM primary keys from model/common.go.
  • createDDNS uses a normal DB.Create(&p) flow and returns p.ID.
  • DDNSProfiles is an unbounded []uint64 in model/server_api.go.
  • No length or existence validation is applied in updateServer.
  • Invalid/future IDs are preserved in the server record.
  • Stored unresolved IDs survive reload.
  • Range prebinding was validated with [1,2,3,4].
  • The DDNS worker consumes stored IDs on future DDNS update events.
  • Worker dispatch can occur after server edit and agent IP-change events.
  • Each DDNS update can retry according to the victim profile's MaxRetries.

This makes the issue semi-practical: exploitation depends on future ID prediction or range prebinding, but the unresolved IDs persist and can become active later.

Expected behavior

PATCH /server/{id} should reject any submitted DDNS profile ID that does not both:

  1. exist, and
  2. belong to the caller or the owner of the server being updated.

The DDNS worker should also avoid trusting stored profile IDs without revalidating ownership before provider resolution or dispatch.

Actual behavior

PATCH /server/{id} accepts nonexistent DDNS profile IDs and persists them. If another user later creates a DDNS profile with a matching ID, the stored reference resolves to that user's profile and is consumed by the DDNS worker for the attacker's server.

Suggested remediation

Apply both bind-time and worker-time validation.

At bind time:

  • Reject nonexistent DDNS profile IDs.
  • Reject DDNS profile IDs that do not belong to the caller/server owner.
  • Reject or limit excessive DDNS profile ID lists if range prebinding is not intended.

At worker time:

  • Revalidate that every resolved DDNS profile still belongs to the owner of the server being processed.
  • Skip or remove stale, nonexistent, or foreign DDNS profile references before provider dispatch.

Suggested regression tests:

  • TestUpdateServerRejectsNonexistentDDNSProfileIDs
  • TestUpdateServerRejectsForeignDDNSProfileIDs
  • TestUpdateServerAcceptsOwnedDDNSProfileIDs
  • TestUpdateDDNSSkipsStaleOrForeignStoredDDNSProfiles

Security relevance

A direct bind to an existing foreign DDNS profile is already denied, which shows the intended ownership boundary. The issue is that the same boundary can be bypassed by storing a future unresolved ID before the victim profile exists.

The worker later treats the stored ID as trusted and dispatches a DDNS update using the victim profile's provider configuration with attacker server context. This is an authorization issue in a deferred worker path, not merely malformed input.

Limitations

  • The attacker does not read victim DDNS credentials through the validated path.
  • Exploitation may require predicting or prebinding future global auto-increment DDNS profile IDs.
  • The downstream DNS impact depends on the victim profile's provider configuration.
  • External DNS modification was not claimed as guaranteed across all providers.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/nezhahq/nezha≥ 2.0.14&&< 2.1.02.1.0go get github.com/nezhahq/nezha@v2.1.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/nezhahq/nezha to 2.1.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-53521 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. 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.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-53521 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2026-53521. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary `PATCH /server/{id}` accepts and persists nonexistent `ddns_profiles` IDs for a member-owned server. If another user later creates a DDNS profile with one of those IDs, the DDNS worker resolves the stored ID and dispatches an update using the other user's DDNS profile configuration in the context of the attacker's server. This is a second-order authorization bypass: direct binding to an existing foreign DDNS profile is correctly denied, but an unresolved future ID can be stored first and later becomes a live cross-user reference. ## Affected versions Confirmed on: - Nezha `v2.0
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2026-53521 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2026-53521 across Go dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2026-53521: nezha (Medium 6.4) | O3 Security