A Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in elFinder before 2.1.46 could allow a malicious user to access the content of internal
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 30/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 65.1% of all records.
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: studio-42/elfinder (Packagist) 2.1.49.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to studio-42/elfinder (Packagist) 2.1.49 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
A Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in elFinder before 2.1.46 could allow a malicious user to access the content of internal network resources. This occurs in get_remote_contents() in php/elFinder.class.php.
- Published
- Jan 14, 2019
- Updated
- Jun 16, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.0% · 65th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-918
Report tools
Action score
30
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 30 / 40 · 7.7 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 1.0%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| std42 | elfinder | cpe:2.3:a:std42:elfinder |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- std42 elfinderbefore 2.1.46
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Packagist | studio-42/elfinder | before 2.1.49 | 2.1.49 |
Same product
std42: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-9194elFinder before 2.1.48 has a command injection vulnerability in the PHP connector.68This week
- CVE-2021-32682Multiple vulnerabilities leading to RCE60This week
- CVE-2021-43421A File Upload vulnerability exists in Studio-42 elFinder 2.0.4 to 2.1.59 via connector.minimal.php, which allows a remote malicious user to 52Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2018-9110Mar 28, 2018 · Studio 42 elFinder before 2.1.37 has a directory traversal vulnerability in elFinder.class.php with the zipdl() function that can allow a re37Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2019-5884Jan 10, 2019 · php/elFinder.class.php in elFinder before 2.1.45 leaks information if PHP's curl extension is enabled and safe_mode or open_basedir is not s23Monitor
- Later →CVE-2021-23394Jun 13, 2021 · Remote Code Execution (RCE)45Plan
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Packagist:studio-42/elfinder | 2.1.49 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- none
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-918 · Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (1 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.