Skip to main content

Boteraser | Website and Server Security Solutions

🛡️ CVE-2026-69246 — guzzle

🟠 CVSS 8.0 — High ✅ No Known Exploit CWE-180 NVD
8.0
CVSS Score
0 Low4 Medium7 High9 Critical10

Description

Guzzle: Noncanonical host can bypass host-based checks

Impact

In affected versions, Guzzle gives a transport the request URI as text and supplies the Host header separately. The cURL handlers set CURLOPT_URL to the URI exactly as written and push that Host into CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER; StreamHandler does the same through fopen(). libcurl then parses the authority itself, percent-decoding it and, on an IDN-capable build, applying IDNA mapping, and uses the result to resolve, connect, name the TLS peer and address a proxy CONNECT, while the supplied Host suppresses the aligned one it would have generated. In http://127.0.0.%31/ the URI host is one filter_var() rejects as an IP literal, yet libcurl decodes it to 127.0.0.1 and reaches loopback with no DNS lookup while the server receives Host: 127.0.0.%31.

An attacker who influences a fetched URI can therefore reach a host the application's checks excluded and read whatever it exposes of the response. The same divergence moves Guzzle's own decisions onto a spelling the transport does not use: no_proxy selects proxy routing from the literal host, and RedirectMiddleware decides from it whether to strip Authorization and Cookie. The cookie middleware extracts Set-Cookie against the URI Guzzle produced, not the authority contacted, so for a raw divergent URI the cookie is stored under the URI host as written. Where Guzzle rewrote that URI but left a divergent Host, or where the caller supplied one, the cookie is stored under the canonical name and replayed by ordinary later requests to it. With a third-party UriInterface, a host of [email protected] reaches 127.0.0.1 through all three handlers and generates Authorization: Basic from userinfo the application never wrote.

Exploitation requires the application to build a request URI from untrusted input and to make a host decision before handing it to Guzzle. Applications that only fetch URIs they construct themselves are not affected, and an exact allowlist of canonical names ordinarily fails closed; the exposure is to denylists, private-range and IP-literal checks, and any check that treats an unresolvable name as safe. The raw Unicode class needs an IDNA transformation somewhere: either a libcurl built with IDN support or Guzzle's own idn_conversion, off by default on both branches, which rewrites the URI in Client::buildUri() before a handler sees it and leaves a prebuilt request's explicit Host as written, while a request the client builds derives that header from the rewritten URI and produces no divergence. Noncanonical numeric spellings such as 127.1, 2130706433, 0x7f000001 and 0177.0.0.1 remain accepted after the patch and reach whatever the transport reads them as, loopback or a routable public host, and the cURL and stream handlers can differ, so a check comparing a host against an address as text stays bypassable. Guzzle does not offer SSRF protection, and neither cache poisoning nor cross-tenant compromise was established.

Patches

This is a summary; the patches are the authority. The issue is fixed in 7.15.2 and 8.0.1, which validate the request host in all three built-in handlers before any network I/O. A URI host is rejected for a byte outside 0x21 to 0x7E, a percent escape, a URI authority delimiter, unbalanced brackets, or numeric-looking parts followed by a trailing dot. That last rule is deliberately conservative and also refuses out-of-range forms libcurl keeps as names, such as 256.0.0.1.. An explicit Host header must be printable ASCII, and on 7.15.2 free of percent escapes. The client also regenerates a derived Host when it rewrites the request URI. Versions before 7.15.2 and version 8.0.0 are affected.

Workarounds

If you cannot upgrade, constrain the host yourself before handing a URI to Guzzle, and constrain any explicit Host header separately, on every redirect hop. The URI rule assumes $uri is a validated GuzzleHttp\Psr7\Uri, so re-parse a third-party UriInterface with new Uri((string) $uri) first.

```php

$host = $uri->getHost();

if (

preg_match('/\A[\x21-\x7E]*\z/D', $host) !== 1

|| strpbrk($host, '%@/?#\\') !== false

|| substr($host, -1) === '.'

) {

throw new RuntimeException('Refusing to fetch this URI host.');

}

if (

preg_match('/\A[\x21-\x7E]*\z/D', $hostHeader) !== 1

|| strpos($hostHeader, '%') !== false

) {

throw new RuntimeException('Refusing to send this Host header.');

}

```

It differs from the patch in both directions: it refuses example.com., which the patch accepts, and it does not canonicalize 127.1 or 0x7f000001. Reparsing the URI separates a valid port from the host and rejects malformed bracket forms, so the snippet checks the host component alone. idn_conversion => true is not an access control, since IDNA maps 127。0。0。1 onto 127.0.0.1 and direct handler use bypasses it, and Uri::getHost() is not an SSRF boundary: i

How this vulnerability can be exploited

This issue can be reached over the network, attack complexity is low, an attacker needs no privileges on the target. No user interaction is required. The scope is changed, meaning a successful attack can affect components beyond the vulnerable one. Rated impact: confidentiality low, integrity low, availability none.

CVSS metrics in full

The score comes from this vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N

  • Attack vector: Network — reachable from anywhere that can route to the service.
  • Attack complexity: Low — the attack works reliably, with no preparation.
  • Privileges required: None — an unauthenticated stranger can try it.
  • User interaction: None — nobody has to be tricked into anything.
  • Scope: Changed — a successful attack reaches components beyond the vulnerable one.
  • Confidentiality impact: Low — limited, and the attacker does not choose what is affected.
  • Integrity impact: Low — limited, and the attacker does not choose what is affected.
  • Availability impact: None.

Weakness class

CVE-2026-69246 is classified as CWE-180: Incorrect Behavior Order: Validate Before Canonicalize. The product validates input before it is canonicalized, which prevents the product from detecting data that becomes invalid after the canonicalization step.

Affected software

CVE-2026-69246 is recorded against 2 packages.

  • guzzlehttp/guzzle (from 8.0.0 up to 8.0.1)
  • unknown

Timeline and source

Published on 3 August 2026 and last revised on 5 August 2026. No public exploit is currently recorded for this entry. Record sourced from NVD.

References

github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Package)
github.com (Web)
github.com (Web)

Other advisories for this package

guzzlehttp/guzzle has other advisories on record. If you are patching this one, these are worth checking on the same host:

Same weakness in other software

These advisories are the same class of weakness (CWE-180: Incorrect Behavior Order: Validate Before Canonicalize) in other software:

Details

Severity HIGH
CVSS Score 8.0
CVSS Vector CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CWE CWE-180
Public Exploit ✅ No
Source NVD
Published 2026-08-03
Updated 2026-08-20
Modified 2026-08-05
Fix URL N/A

Affected Packages

Software From version Fixed in
guzzlehttp/guzzle 8.0.0 8.0.1
unknown

Site Security Check

Is guzzle part of your stack?

CVE-2026-69246 is rated CVSS 8.0 High. BotEraser scans your installation against known CVE records and tells you whether this vulnerability applies to the versions you actually run.

Scan My Site Free →

No credit card required  ·  Results in minutes

ⓘ Data Notice: The information presented above has been compiled from publicly available internet sources. Boteraser aggregates this data solely for informational purposes and does not independently classify, evaluate, or endorse any findings about the vulnerabilities listed. The accuracy and completeness of this information is the sole responsibility of the original publishers. Boteraser and its operators accept no liability for any decisions made based on this data.

Browse related advisories

All advisoriesCVECVE 2026