vLLM is vulnerable to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) through `MediaConnector` class

Description

Summary

A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in the MediaConnector class within the vLLM project's multimodal feature set. The load_from_url and load_from_url_async methods fetch and process media from user-provided URLs without adequate restrictions on the target hosts. This allows an attacker to coerce the vLLM server into making arbitrary requests to internal network resources.

This vulnerability is particularly critical in containerized environments like llm-d, where a compromised vLLM pod could be used to scan the internal network, interact with other pods, and potentially cause denial of service or access sensitive data. For example, an attacker could make the vLLM pod send malicious requests to an internal llm-d management endpoint, leading to system instability by falsely reporting metrics like the KV cache state.

Vulnerability Details

The core of the vulnerability lies in the MediaConnector.load_from_url method and its asynchronous counterpart. These methods accept a URL string to fetch media content (images, audio, video).

https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/blob/119f683949dfed10df769fe63b2676d7f1eb644e/vllm/multimodal/utils.py#L97-L113

The function directly processes URLs with http, https, and file schemes. An attacker can supply a URL pointing to an internal IP address or a localhost endpoint. The vLLM server will then initiate a connection to this internal resource.

  • HTTP/HTTPS Scheme: An attacker can craft a request like {"image_url": "http://127.0.0.1:8080/internal_api"}. The vLLM server will send a GET request to this internal endpoint.
  • File Scheme: The _load_file_url method attempts to restrict file access to a subdirectory defined by --allowed-local-media-path. While this is a good security measure for local file access, it does not prevent network-based SSRF attacks.

Impact in llm-d Environments

The risk is significantly amplified in orchestrated environments such as llm-d, where multiple pods communicate over an internal network.

  1. Denial of Service (DoS): An attacker could target internal management endpoints of other services within the llm-d cluster. For instance, if a monitoring or metrics service is exposed internally, an attacker could send malformed requests to it. A specific example is an attacker causing the vLLM pod to call an internal API that reports a false KV cache utilization, potentially triggering incorrect scaling decisions or even a system shutdown.

  2. Internal Network Reconnaissance: Attackers can use the vulnerability to scan the internal network for open ports and services by providing URLs like http://10.0.0.X:PORT and observing the server's response time or error messages.

  3. Interaction with Internal Services: Any unsecured internal service becomes a potential target. This could include databases, internal APIs, or other model pods that might not have robust authentication, as they are not expected to be directly exposed.

Delegating this security responsibility to an upper-level orchestrator like llm-d is problematic. The orchestrator cannot easily distinguish between legitimate requests initiated by the vLLM engine for its own purposes and malicious requests originating from user input, thus complicating traffic filtering rules and increasing management overhead.

Fix

See the --allowed-media-domains option discussed here: https://docs.vllm.ai/en/latest/usage/security.html#4-restrict-domains-access-for-media-urls

Basic information

Type
reviewed
Severity
high
Advisory on GitHub
Open advisory ↗
Repository advisory
Open repository advisory ↗
Source code
Browse source ↗
Published (advisory)
2025-10-07 22:14:15 UTC
Updated
2025-10-27 20:00:22 UTC
GitHub reviewed
2025-10-07 22:14:15 UTC
NVD published
2025-10-07

EPSS Score

Score Percentile
0.05% 14.57%

CVSS Scores

Base score Version Severity Vector
7.1 3.1
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:N)
Could be attacked over the internet or any normal routed network—not just someone sitting at the machine.
Attack complexity (AC:H)
Even with access, the exploit needs extra luck, timing, or a fussy environment to actually work.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:H)
Serious risk that confidential data gets exposed in a big way.
Integrity (I:L)
Attackers could change some data, but it’s limited—not everything goes.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.

Identifiers

CWEs

CWE id Name
CWE-601 URL Redirection to Untrusted Site ('Open Redirect')
CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Credits

  • kexinoh (finder)
  • d3do-23 (reporter)
  • lonelyuan (reporter)
  • huachenheli (remediation_developer)
  • DarkLight1337 (remediation_reviewer)
  • russellb (coordinator)
  • sidhpurwala-huzaifa (coordinator)

Affected packages (1)

Vulnerable version ranges and first patched releases as published by GitHub.

Ecosystem Package Vulnerable range First patched Vulnerable functions
pip vllm >= 0.5.0, < 0.11.0 0.11.0

References

cvelogic Threat Intelligence