CVE-2026-116069: Albert-Weasker niubigeo advisory

Advisory generated from the CVE record, CISA, Exploit Observer and VEDAS: what it is, whether it is exploited, who is affected, and how to fix and detect it.

What it is

NiubiGEO before 0.3.2 contains an unauthenticated server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows remote attackers to make the server fetch internal addresses by supplying a crafted domain value to POST /audit-plan. Attackers can submit IP literals, localhost, or private and link-local hosts to read loopback, internal-network, or cloud metadata responses returned in the plan’s siteEvidence JSON.

Description quoted from the CVE record (assigned by VulnCheck, published 2026-10-25).

Weakness: Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

How it can be exploited

Exploitable over the network with low attack complexity with no special attack requirements needing no privileges and no user interaction. Impact: confidentiality low, integrity low, availability none. CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Public exploit evidence (Exploit Observer)

Also known as: GHSA-m945-23c9-6845

VEDAS cluster: VEDAS:DOVEDAWN

Exploit Observer links 5 pieces of public exploit code or detection modules that name this CVE or one of its aliases.

Exploit code and modules (5)

Code that names this CVE. A repository can be a working exploit, a scanner, a fake or malware; read it before running anything.

Vulnerability databases and vendor advisories (2)

Catalogue entries, not exploit evidence.

Vulnerability database or vendor advisory: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-m945-23c9-6845
Vulnerability database or vendor advisory: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-116069

2 more references returned by Exploit Observer did not name this CVE or an alias, so they are left out.

VEDAS data as of 2026-11-01T17:12 UTC; fetched 2026-11-02.

Live scores

EPSS: 0.003
low predicted chance of attack
VEDAS: 0.988
strong exploit evidence
On CISA KEV: Not listed
Detection rule: Nuclei · Suricata

Who is affected

Product	Affected	Not affected
Albert-Weasker niubigeo	before 0.3.2	Not stated

Version ranges exactly as the CVE record states them. “Before X” means X is the first fixed version.

How to fix it

Fixed versions stated in the CVE record: 0.3.2.

Vendor guidance:

https://github.com/Albert-Weasker/niubigeo/commit/299b9e71881d445e976012ad75ecdd05ce802715 (patch)
v0.3.2 Release Notes (release-notes)

How to detect it

Nuclei template (active check)

NiubiGEO - Unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery
NiubiGEO before 0.3.2 contains an unauthenticated server-side request forgery in POST /audit-plan. The `domain` field is fetched server-side without blocking internal, loopback or link-local hosts, so an attacker can point the audit at internal addresses (loopback, private ranges, or cloud metadata). Fixed builds reject such hosts with HTTP 400 “domain must be a public HTTP(S) website”, while vulnerable builds accept the internal target and return the generated plan with HTTP 201.

Name and description quoted from the template, written by VEDAS.

The template sends 1 request (POST /audit-plan); it decides using dsl matchers. Severity in the template: medium. Marked as not yet verified against a live vulnerable target.

Run it against a host you own or are authorised to test:

bash

nuclei -u https://your-host -t CVE-2026-116069.yaml

Show the template (39 lines)

yaml

id: CVE-2026-116069

info:
  name: "NiubiGEO - Unauthenticated Server-Side Request Forgery"
  author: vedas-arpsyndicate
  severity: medium
  description: |
    NiubiGEO before 0.3.2 contains an unauthenticated server-side request forgery in
    POST /audit-plan. The `domain` field is fetched server-side without blocking internal,
    loopback or link-local hosts, so an attacker can point the audit at internal addresses
    (loopback, private ranges, or cloud metadata). Fixed builds reject such hosts with
    HTTP 400 "domain must be a public HTTP(S) website", while vulnerable builds accept the
    internal target and return the generated plan with HTTP 201.
  reference:
    - https://www.exploit.observer/?keyword=CVE-2026-116069&match=exact
    - https://subdomain.center/?engine=ammonites&keyword=niubigeo&match=exact
  classification:
    cvss-metrics: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
    cve-id: CVE-2026-116069
    cwe-id: CWE-918
  metadata:
    verified: false
  tags: cve,cve2026,niubigeo,ssrf
http:
  - raw:
      - |
        POST /audit-plan HTTP/1.1
        Host: {{Hostname}}
        Content-Type: application/json

        {"domain":"http://127.0.0.1","name":"vedas"}

    matchers:
      - type: dsl
        dsl:
          - 'status_code == 201'
          - 'contains(body, "\"plan\"")'
          - '!contains(body, "domain must be a public")'
        condition: and

CVE-2026-116069.yaml on GitHub

Suricata rules (network detection)

1 rule that alert on traffic matching this exploit: VEDAS CVE-2026-116069 NiubiGEO - Unauthenticated SSRF via audit-plan internal domain. Add them to your Suricata rule set and reload.

Show the rules

suricata

alert http $EXTERNAL_NET any -> $HTTP_SERVERS $HTTP_PORTS (msg:"VEDAS CVE-2026-116069 NiubiGEO - Unauthenticated SSRF via audit-plan internal domain"; flow:established,to_server; http.method; content:"POST"; http.uri; content:"/audit-plan"; fast_pattern; http.request_body; content:"|22|domain|22|"; nocase; pcre:"/\x22domain\x22\s*\x3a\s*\x22(?:https?\x3a\x2f\x2f)?(?:127\.|10\.|192\.168\.|169\.254\.|0\.0\.0\.0|172\.(?:1[6-9]|2\d|3[01])\.|localhost|\x5b?\x3a\x3a1)/i"; classtype:web-application-attack; reference:cve,CVE-2026-116069; reference:url,https://www.exploit.observer/?keyword=CVE-2026-116069&match=exact; reference:url,https://subdomain.center/?engine=ammonites&keyword=niubigeo&match=exact; sid:1090200; rev:1;)

CVE-2026-116069.rules on GitHub

References

Other databases

Where this comes from

This advisory is generated automatically by VEDAS from: CVE.org record, cve-scores (EPSS and VEDAS), Exploit Observer, vedas-signatures. Text in quotes is reproduced from the source; everything else is a fixed template filled with source fields. Nothing here is written by a language model. Check the vendor advisory before acting, and read how VEDAS and Exploit Observer work, and their limits.