CVE-2026-92804 json
Nango through 0.70.4 Server-Side Request Forgery via Configuration
published 2mo ago modified 29d ago also EUVD-2026-81064 , GHSA-hgjm-c252-ccxx
Unreviewed: the maintainers' own advisory
Published by the maintainers on their GitHub repository NangoHQ/nango. GitHub has not reviewed it into the GitHub Advisory Database, so the affected packages and versions are the maintainers' word. Read the full advisory on GitHub.
- cvss
- 7.1
- version 3.1, CNA
- cisa kev
- Not listed
- not in CISA's catalog
- epss
- 0.4%
- EPSS 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 31%
- public exploits
- 0
- none known
Summary
Nango through 0.70.4 fails to validate caller-supplied connection configuration values interpolated into provider token and proxy URL templates. Authenticated attackers can supply malicious configuration values to direct server requests at internal addresses or cloud metadata endpoints, potentially exfiltrating provider credentials.
Is CVE-2026-92804 in your stack? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.
Check with FencerCISA SSVC
- Exploitation
- Proof of concept is public
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
- Assessed
- last mo.
Exploit prediction
0.37% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 31% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-11).
Exploits and checks
- github.com https://github.com/NangoHQ/nango/security/advisories/GHSA-hgjm-c252-ccxx referenced PoC, tagged "exploit" by a source, unverified
CVSS scores
| assigned by | version | score | vector |
|---|---|---|---|
| CNA | 4.0 | 7.1 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N |
| CNA | 3.1 | 7.1 | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N |
| CNA | 4.0 | 7.1 | CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X |
Inferred packages
No advisory lists a package for this vulnerability yet. The CVE names these as products and links their GitHub repository, and the package registry names the same repository, so they are probably the affected packages. Low confidence: the versions are the CVE’s own for the product, and a stack check reports the package as unchecked when there are none.
| ecosystem | package | repository | affected |
|---|---|---|---|
| npm | nango | nangohq/nango | no versions given |
Affected products
- NangoHQ Nango
Classification
- Weakness
-
- CWE-918 Server-Side Request Forgery
References
-
github.com
/NangoHQ/nango/security/advisories/GHSA-hgjm-c252-ccxx
third-party-advisory, vendor-advisory, exploit, advisory
-
github.com
/NangoHQ/nango/blob/v0.70.4/packages/shared/lib/utils/utils.ts
technical-description
-
github.com
/NangoHQ/nango
product
-
vulncheck.com
/advisories/nango-through-0.70.4-server-side-request-forgery-via-configuration
third-party-advisory
Sources
- CVE List CVE-2026-92804
- NVD CVE-2026-92804
- Maintainer advisory GHSA-hgjm-c252-ccxx
Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.
The maintainers of NangoHQ/nango published their own advisory on GitHub. Reviewed sources take precedence over it.