twenty up to 1.18.0 SecureHttpClientService server-side request forgery

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in twenty up to 1.18.0. This impacts an unknown function of the component SecureHttpClientService. Performing a manipulation results in server-side request forgery. This vulnerability is reported as CVE-2026-33975. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in twenty up to 1.18.0. This affects some unknown processing of the component SecureHttpClientService. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a server-side request forgery vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-918. The web server receives a URL or similar request from an upstream component and retrieves the contents of this URL, but it does not sufficiently ensure that the request is being sent to the expected destination. This is going to have an impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:

Twenty is an open source CRM built with NestJS (Node.js). In versions 1.18.0 and earlier, the SSRF protection in twenty-server's SecureHttpClientService can be bypassed using IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses in URL IP literals. Node.js's URL parser normalizes IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses to compressed hex form (e.g., ::ffff:169.254.169.254 becomes ::ffff:a9fe:a9fe), but the isPrivateIp utility only recognizes the dotted-decimal notation. As a result, the hex form passes the SSRF check unchecked. Additionally, the socket lookup validation event does not fire for IP literal addresses, bypassing the second validation layer. An authenticated user can reach any internal IP, including cloud metadata endpoints, to exfiltrate credentials such as IAM keys.

It is possible to read the advisory at github.com. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2026-33975 since 03/24/2026. The exploitability is told to be easy. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The technical details are unknown and an exploit is not publicly available. The pricing for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 05/06/2026).

There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.

The vulnerability is also documented in the vulnerability database at EUVD (EUVD-2026-27452). Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Productinfo

Name

• twenty

Version

• 1.0
• 1.1
• 1.2
• 1.3
• 1.4
• 1.5
• 1.6
• 1.7
• 1.8
• 1.9
• 1.10
• 1.11
• 1.12
• 1.13
• 1.14
• 1.15
• 1.16
• 1.17
• 1.18.0

CPE 2.3info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CPE 2.2info

• 🔒
• 🔒
• 🔒

CVSSv4info

CVSSv3info

CVSSv2info

Exploitinginfo

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Countermeasuresinfo

Timelineinfo

Sourcesinfo

Entryinfo

Statistical analysis made it clear that VulDB provides the best quality for vulnerability data.

Discussion