CVSS 4.0
8.3 highCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:NCVE-2026-125114 Novu: SSRF via conditions filter webhook bypasses validateUrlSsrf() protection
High (8.3) in novuhq novu. EPSS 0.3% estimated probability of exploitation activity in the next 30 days. Fixed in @novu/api 3.15.0.
On this page
Novu provides an API for sending notifications through multiple channels. Prior to 3.15.0, the conditions filter webhook in libs/application-generic/src/usecases/conditions-filter/conditions-filter.usecase.ts passes the user-configured child.webhookUrl directly to axios.post without calling validateUrlSsrf. Evaluating a workflow condition can therefore make the worker send a POST request to a private or link-local service and return the response data for condition evaluation. The response is stored in execution details and exposed through GET /execution-details, which can disclose credentials from POST-capable metadata services or data from internal services, although metadata endpoints that require GET are not reachable through this path. This issue is fixed in version 3.15.0.
Severity
- EPSS
- 0.3% estimated probability of exploitation activity in the next 30 days; 26th percentile. Scored 2026-11-13. A forecast for this CVE across the internet, not for your own systems.
- CISA's assessment (SSVC)
- Exploitation: PoC · Automatable: no · Technical impact: partial, assessed 2026-11-14. From CISA's Vulnrichment in the CVE List: whether it is exploited, whether exploiting it can be automated, and how much control it gives.
- CWE
- CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)
- OWASP Top 10
- A01:2025 Broken Access Control
- Published
- Modified
- Assigned by
- GitHub_M (CNA)
- NVD analysis
- Not in the NVD yet
- Record from
- the CVE List, synced
Ask an AI about this CVE
Show the prompt
Explain CVE-2026-125114 for an engineer deciding whether to act. Use https://cve.bz/api/public/cves/CVE-2026-125114?via=ask-ai-copy and https://cve.bz/cve/CVE-2026-125114?via=ask-ai-copy as the source of truth: what is affected and which versions fix it, whether it is in CISA KEV, public exploits, and its EPSS (an internet-wide 30-day estimate of exploitation activity, not a forecast for my systems). If they give no fixed versions, use the CVE record https://cveawg.mitre.org/api/cve/CVE-2026-125114 or the vendor advisory, not third-party mirrors. Tell me how to check whether I am affected and how to verify a fix. Cite the sources and say where they are uncertain.Opens a third-party assistant; its answer is its own, not cve.bz's. The prompt holds only this CVE's id and public links.
Badge for a README or a site
An image that stays current: it is drawn from the data each time it is fetched (a host that proxies images, as GitHub does, may show its copy for a while). Markdown:
[](https://cve.bz/cve/CVE-2026-125114)
HTML:
<a href="https://cve.bz/cve/CVE-2026-125114"><img src="https://cve.bz/cve/badge/CVE-2026-125114.svg" alt="CVE-2026-125114"></a>
Affected
Versions
From the CNA's record in the CVE List.
| Product | Affected |
|---|---|
| novuhq novu | < 3.15.0 |
Fix and patched versions
@novu/api(npm): fixed in 3.15.0
Packages (OSV)
| Advisory | Ecosystem | Package | Affected | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GHSA-4x48-cgf9-q33f | npm | @novu/api | <3.15.0 | 3.15.0 |
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- CAPEC-664 Server Side Request Forgery Likelihood: High · Severity: High
The attack patterns MITRE's CAPEC relates to this record's weaknesses, as MITRE names them. Credits.