Know every vulnerabilitybefore 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.
GHSA-q537-8fr5-cw35
No affected components available
Summary
The v4_is_invalid() function in activitypub-federation-rust (src/utils.rs) does not check for Ipv4Addr::UNSPECIFIED (0.0.0.0). An unauthenticated attacker controlling a remote domain can point it to 0.0.0.0, bypass the SSRF protection introduced by the fix for CVE-2025-25194 (GHSA-7723-35v7-qcxw), and reach localhost services on the target server.
Details
File: src/utils.rs in activitypub-federation-rust
Function: v4_is_invalid(v4: Ipv4Addr) -> bool
The function checks is_private(), is_loopback(), is_link_local(), is_multicast(), and is_documentation() — but omits is_unspecified(). On Linux, macOS, and Windows, TCP connections to 0.0.0.0 are routed to localhost (127.0.0.1).
Additionally, ::ffff:0.0.0.0 (IPv4-mapped IPv6) also bypasses because v6_is_invalid() calls to_ipv4_mapped().is_some_and(v4_is_invalid), inheriting the same gap. Notably, v6_is_invalid() already includes is_unspecified() for native IPv6, making this an asymmetric oversight.
Independent secondary finding — DNS Rebinding TOCTOU:
is_invalid_ip() resolves DNS via lookup_host() for validation, but reqwest resolves DNS again for the actual connection. With TTL=0 DNS responses, an attacker can return a legitimate IP for the first resolution (passes check) and 127.0.0.1 for the second (reqwest connects to localhost). CVSS for rebinding alone: 4.8 (AC:H).
PoC
1. Logic Proof (reproduced from source):
fn v4_is_invalid(v4: Ipv4Addr) -> bool {
v4.is_private()
|| v4.is_loopback()
|| v4.is_link_local()
|| v4.is_multicast()
|| v4.is_documentation()
// BUG: Missing || v4.is_unspecified()
}
assert_eq!(v4_is_invalid(Ipv4Addr::UNSPECIFIED), false); // 0.0.0.0 PASSES validation
assert_eq!(v4_is_invalid(Ipv4Addr::LOCALHOST), true); // 127.0.0.1 correctly blocked
2. OS Routing Verification:
$ connect(0.0.0.0:80) → ConnectionRefused
ConnectionRefused proves the OS routed to localhost (port 80 not listening). Any service on 0.0.0.0:PORT is reachable.
3. Attack Chain:
- Attacker configures DNS:
evil.com A → 0.0.0.0 -
- Attacker sends ActivityPub activity referencing
https://evil.com/actor
- Attacker sends ActivityPub activity referencing
-
- Library calls
verify_url_valid()→is_invalid_ip()→ resolves to 0.0.0.0
- Library calls
-
v4_is_invalid(0.0.0.0)returnsfalse(BYPASS)
-
reqwestconnects to 0.0.0.0 → reaches localhost services
Impact
- Direct: Bypasses the SSRF protection layer for all ActivityPub federation traffic
-
- Downstream: 6+ dependent projects affected including Lemmy (13.7k stars), hatsu, gill, ties, fediscus, fediverse-axum
-
- Attacker can: Access cloud instance metadata (169.254.169.254 via rebinding), reach internal services on localhost, port scan internal infrastructure
Suggested Fix
fn v4_is_invalid(v4: Ipv4Addr) -> bool {
v4.is_private()
|| v4.is_loopback()
|| v4.is_link_local()
|| v4.is_multicast()
|| v4.is_documentation()
|| v4.is_unspecified() // ADD: blocks 0.0.0.0
|| v4.is_broadcast() // ADD: blocks 255.255.255.255
}
For DNS rebinding TOCTOU, pin the resolved IP:
let resolved_ip = lookup_host((domain, 80)).await?;
// validate resolved_ip...
let client = reqwest::Client::builder()
.resolve(domain, resolved_ip) // pin resolution
.build()?;
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.
Exploitation attempts have been detected. Elevated vigilance and prompt remediation are advised.
The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.
We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.
Browse More
Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.
Checkout DevGuard