How severe is GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q has a CVSS score of 6.5/10, rated MEDIUM. Review your exposure and patch according to your risk tolerance.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q affects the following packages: github.com/darklynx/request-baskets (Go). Ecosystems affected: Go.

How do I fix GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

No patched version of github.com/darklynx/request-baskets has shipped for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.

How do I detect GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q in my Go dependencies?

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

How do I mitigate GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q 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 GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Is GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q actively exploited in the wild?

Yes. There are 8 known exploit references for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q, including 5 in-the-wild exploitations observed on GitHub and other sources. Treat this as actively exploitable and prioritize patching immediately. All exploit code should only be run in an isolated sandbox environment for research or authorized testing — never against production systems without explicit written authorization.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 6.6%, placing it in the 94th 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 GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q 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.

Is there exploit tooling available for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q?

A Nuclei detection template exists for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q, meaning automated scanners can fingerprint it. Public exploit tooling significantly increases real-world risk — prioritize patching and ensure detection coverage. Exploit tooling should only ever be used in isolated, authorized testing environments.

When was GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q was published on March 31, 2023 and was last updated on November 8, 2023. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐹

🐹 Go

Not in CISA KEV

MEDIUM severity

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q — request-baskets

MEDIUM

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q is a medium-severity (CVSS 6.5) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in github.com/darklynx/request-baskets. 8 public exploit references exist, so weaponization risk is real. No vendor fix is recorded yet; mitigation options are listed below.

request-baskets vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery

Also known asCVE-2023-27163

Published

Mar 31, 2023

Updated

Nov 8, 2023

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

None yet

Exploits

8 known

Exploitation data as of Sep 18, 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.
A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

6.6%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk0.00%

Lower risk than most CVEs94th percentile — riskier than 94% 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

GHSA-58g2-vgpg-335q 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 376,715 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/darklynx/request-baskets

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

request-baskets up to v1.2.1 was discovered to contain a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via the component /api/baskets/{name}. This vulnerability allows attackers to access network resources and sensitive information via a crafted API request.

Affected Packages

1 total

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐹Go	`github.com/darklynx/request-baskets`	all versions	No fix

Exploits & PoCs

Research use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.