PULSE
FEED
ransomgenesis reclama a Acclaim Companies / JCJ Investment · US · Financial Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Gilliam & Associates, P.C · US · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Facts N Figures · US · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Illinois Work Injury Resource Center (IWIRC) · US · Healthcareransomgenesis reclama a Psychometrics Canada · CA · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Louisiana Crane & Construction · US · Manufacturingransomgenesis reclama a Aliqout Association · USransomgenesis reclama a EAS Engineering · US · Manufacturingransomgenesis reclama a Fred H Beck & Associates · US · Professional Servicesransomwhitearmor reclama a KTU Shipyard · PH · Transportationransomsilentransomgroup reclama a Moritt Hock & Hamroff LLP · US · Professional Servicesransomsilentransomgroup reclama a P...ransomqilin reclama a TRAUCO AG · DE · Manufacturingransomqilin reclama a Honghwa International · TW · Manufacturingransomgenesis reclama a Acclaim Companies / JCJ Investment · US · Financial Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Gilliam & Associates, P.C · US · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Facts N Figures · US · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Illinois Work Injury Resource Center (IWIRC) · US · Healthcareransomgenesis reclama a Psychometrics Canada · CA · Professional Servicesransomgenesis reclama a Louisiana Crane & Construction · US · Manufacturingransomgenesis reclama a Aliqout Association · USransomgenesis reclama a EAS Engineering · US · Manufacturingransomgenesis reclama a Fred H Beck & Associates · US · Professional Servicesransomwhitearmor reclama a KTU Shipyard · PH · Transportationransomsilentransomgroup reclama a Moritt Hock & Hamroff LLP · US · Professional Servicesransomsilentransomgroup reclama a P...ransomqilin reclama a TRAUCO AG · DE · Manufacturingransomqilin reclama a Honghwa International · TW · Manufacturing
← Todos los CVEs
CVE Watch23 oct 2026

CVE-2026-48061

Litestar is an Asynchronous Server Gateway Interface (ASGI) framework. In versions prior to 2.22.0, an attacker can bypass the allowed hosts

CVSS

5.9

Medio

EPSS

0.4%

p31

KEV

—

Exploit Today

9

0-100

Publicado: 3 ago 2026 · Última mod.: 23 oct 2026 · CWE-644

EPSS · 30d
0.4%EPSS · 30 días0.4%
2026-10-022026-10-29
Descripción técnica

Litestar is an Asynchronous Server Gateway Interface (ASGI) framework. In versions prior to 2.22.0, an attacker can bypass the allowed hosts validation by omitting the Host header and supplying an X-Forwarded-Host header set to a whitelisted domain. The AllowedHostsMiddleware trusts the X-Forwarded-Host header as a fallback when the Host header is absent. Since X-Forwarded-Host is a client-controllable header, this enables host header injection attacks such as password reset poisoning, cache poisoning, and server-side request routing manipulation. Any application using AllowedHostsConfig is affected when deployed without a reverse proxy that strips X-Forwarded-Host, or when accepting HTTP/1.0 connections. This issue has been fixed in version 2.22.0.

Referencias oficiales
CVEs relacionados
CVECVSSEPSSKEVRExplotTítuloVis.
CVE-2026-1107237.5 ALT
27.1%
——8In `api-gateway` versions till `1.7.3`, The default rate-limit key resolver, `ClientIpKeyResolver`, derives the per-client bucket key from the leftmost element of the `X-Forwarded-For` request header. That element is supplied by the originating HTTP client and is not validated against any trusted-proxy list. A single attacker can therefore obtain an unlimited number of independent rate-limit buckets — one per unique header value — and completely bypass the gateway's request-rate limiting on every route that uses the shipped default configuration.16d
CVE-2026-691837.5 ALT
41.4%
——12Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 26.26.0 and earlier, the backend rate-limit key generator in backend/src/middlewares/rate-limit.ts uses client-controlled cf-connecting-ip and x-forwarded-for headers before the trust-proxy-derived req.ip value. An unauthenticated attacker can rotate either header to create a new bucket for each request, bypassing rootRateLimiter, badAuthRateLimiter, getKey(), and the getKeyWithUid() fallback used by public endpoints. This permits repeated POST /users/forgotPasswordEmail and verificationEmail requests, mail bombing registered users, consuming Firebase or SMTP quota, evading brute-force protection, and enabling resource exhaustion. Exploitability of cf-connecting-ip depends on deployment topology, but x-forwarded-for and direct-to-origin paths remain affected when those values are not overwritten by a trusted proxy. No fixed version is available as of this review.12d
CVE-2026-671797.8 ALT
11.6%
——3Genkit does not properly validate host request headers. Any host on the developer's network, and any website the developer visits (via DNS rebinding), can reach POST /api/runAction on the Dev UI server (default port 4000) and execute any registered Genkit action and read the result. Fixed on 2026-06-18.6d
CVE-2026-667785.3 MED
29.5%
——9SAP Approuter does not sufficiently sanitize certain request headers before forwarding traffic to internal components. An unauthenticated attacker could send a specially crafted request to obtain limited unauthorized access to information. This results in a low impact on confidentiality. There is no impact on integrity and availability.6d
CVE-2026-725746.1 MED
36.4%
——11A host header injection vulnerability in picocms/Pico through 2.1.4 allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to control the origin of JavaScript and CSS assets loaded by the default theme. When base_url is unset (the default), Pico::getBaseUrl in lib/Pico.php builds the base URL from unvalidated Host, X-Forwarded-Host, X-Forwarded-Proto, and X-Forwarded-Port request headers.6d
CVE-2026-05166.5 MED
27.7%
——8A improper neutralization of HTTP Headers for Scripting Syntax vulnerability in SonicOS could allow a remote attacker to manipulate the Host header and redirect firewall management users to arbitrary web domains.7d