Dify before 1.15.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows any authenticated console user to bypass SSRF protections and issue arbitrary HTTP requests to internal services and cloud metadata endpoints due to the Squid proxy configuration only defining source ACLs without destination deny rules and the make_request() helper performing no independent destination IP validation. Attackers can use endpoints such as GET /console/api/remote-files/<url>, POST /console/api/remote-files/upload, the HTTP Request workflow node, website crawl, or document import from URL to reach internal components like the sandbox, internal APIs, and PostgreSQL, and on AWS deployments read IAM credentials from the instance metadata service, with the HTTP Request node further enabling POST, PUT, and DELETE writes to internal services relying on network isolation for authorization.
Exploitation: none · Automatable: yes · Technical impact: partial, assessed 2026-11-06. From CISA's Vulnrichment in the CVE List: whether it is exploited, whether exploiting it can be automated, and how much control it gives.
Show the promptExplain CVE-2026-58141 for an engineer deciding whether to act. Use https://cve.bz/api/public/cves/CVE-2026-58141?via=ask-ai-copy and https://cve.bz/cve/CVE-2026-58141?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-2026-58141 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.
Versions
From the CNA's record in the CVE List.
Product
Affected
langgenius dify
from 0.6.0 before 1.15.0
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.