Attack ChainAIDerived
Hypothetical attack flow derived from CVE metadata – not a confirmed exploit chain
-
AccessAuthenticate to TREK as low-privileged user
-
DeliveryPoint attacker DNS AAAA record at IPv6 transition address embedding internal IPv4
-
ExploitSubmit hostname to import/webhook/plugin egress feature
-
ExecutionGuard fails to decode embedded IPv4 and allows request
-
PersistServer fetches internal service or cloud metadata
-
ImpactExfiltrate returned internal data
Vulnerability Assessment
| Weakness |
CWE
OWASP Top 10:2025
A01:2025 - Broken Access Control
ASVS 5.0
V4 - API and Web Service URL allowlisting, SSRF prevention
MITRE ATT&CK
2 techniques across 2 tactics: Initial Access, Credential Access The technique list with ATT&CK links and the kill-chain view is part of the Basic plan and up. |
| Exploitation Conditions | Requires an authenticated TREK account (PR:L) whose user can control a DNS record so its AAAA response resolves to a NAT64, 6to4, or Teredo IPv6 transition address encoding a private, loopback, or link-local IPv4 destination. The controlled hostname must be fed into a feature that performs server-side egress - user-facing imports, webhooks, integrations, or plugin egress. The decisive limiting factor is that the hosting environment must actually ROUTE the chosen transition format (NAT64/6to4/Teredo); deployments that do not route any of these formats are not exploitable via this path, which is why CVSS assigns AC:H. Impact is limited to confidentiality (disclosure of returned internal/metadata content); no integrity or availability effect. Fixed in TREK 3.4.0. |
| Impact | This is a genuine but conditional SSRF, not a top-tier priority. The CVSS 3.1 vector (AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N = 6.3, MEDIUM) is internally consistent with the description: network-reachable, but AC:H reflects two real hurdles - the attacker must control a DNS record AND the target deployment must actually route the specific IPv6 transition format (NAT64, 6to4, or Teredo) being abused. PR:L confirms authentication is required. There is NO EPSS score, NO CISA KEV listing, and NO public proof-of-concept, so exploitation status is 'no public exploit identified at time of analysis.' The scope change (S:C) and C:H are justified because a successful bypass reaches internal services or cloud metadata outside the application's security authority, exposing returned data (confidentiality only; I:N/A:N). No signals conflict: the moderate CVSS, absent exploitation telemetry, and niche product footprint all point to a low real-world urgency issue that should be patched routinely rather than as an emergency. The main caveat is that risk is highly deployment-dependent - an environment that does not route any of the named transition formats is effectively not exploitable via this path. |
| Exploit ScenarioDerived | An authenticated TREK user who can control a DNS record points a hostname's AAAA record at an IPv6 NAT64/6to4/Teredo transition address that embeds an internal IPv4 target (e.g., 127.0.0.1 or a cloud metadata endpoint at 169.254.169.254). They then submit that hostname to a user-facing import, webhook, integration, or plugin egress feature; ssrfGuard.ts fails to decode the embedded IPv4 and permits the request, returning internal service or metadata content to the attacker. No public PoC exists, and exploitation only succeeds where the deployment actually routes the chosen transition format. |
Get an e-mail when this CVE is exploited, patched or re-scored. Free account.
Alert meAnalysisAIv1 – Sep 24, 2026
Server-side request forgery in TREK (versions prior to 3.4.0) allows an authenticated user to reach internal services or cloud metadata by supplying a URL whose DNS AAAA answer is a NAT64, 6to4, or Teredo IPv6 transition address that encodes a private, loopback, or link-local IPv4 target, bypassing the checkSsrf guard in server/src/utils/ssrfGuard.ts. Exploitation is conditional rather than automatic: it requires a valid TREK account, attacker control of a DNS record, a feature that performs server-side egress (imports, webhooks, integrations, or plugin egress), and a hosting environment that actually routes the chosen transition format - the reason the assessed CVSS is 6.3 (AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N) with high attack complexity and confidentiality-only impact. No public exploit code has been identified at time of analysis, and TREK 3.4.0 fixes the flaw.
RemediationAI
Upgrade to TREK 3.4.0, the vendor-released patch, available from the release page at https://github.com/liketrek/TREK/releases/tag/v3.4.0; the hardening reference is PR https://github.com/liketrek/TREK/pull/1540 with commit a2bd9be184a94997105ce190dad920c41e7b10df, and the advisory is at https://github.com/liketrek/TREK/security/advisories/GHSA-9hpq-mrpx-mcxg. If immediate upgrade is not possible, apply compensating controls that target the actual exploitation preconditions rather than generic hardening: restrict the egress-capable features (disable or disable-by-policy user-facing imports, webhooks, integrations, and plugin egress) so attackers cannot feed a controlled hostname into the fetch path - the trade-off is loss of those integrations; enforce network-layer egress filtering that denies traffic from the TREK container to RFC 1918, loopback, and link-local ranges including the cloud metadata endpoints (169.254.169.254 and its IPv6 counterpart fd00:ec2::254), which contains the blast radius even if the guard is bypassed but requires egress-proxy or firewall maintenance; and block the transition prefixes 64:ff9b::/96 (NAT64), 2002::/16 (6to4), and 2001::/32 (Teredo) at the boundary, or run TREK in an environment that does not route these formats at all, which is the same condition that makes the CVSS attack complexity high - the trade-off is that disabling these formats breaks legitimate NAT64/6to4/Teredo connectivity for that network segment. Where cloud metadata is a concern, requiring IMDSv2 with a low hop limit complements the egress filtering but does not replace the upgrade. No vendor workaround beyond upgrading is documented in the advisory.
Affected VersionsENISA
Affected Packages
Source: OSV (Open Source Vulnerabilities)
Affects your stack
Affects 1 package in euvd
Checking this CVE against your own stacks and servers is part of the Basic plan and up.
Technical ContextAI · show details
The vulnerability class is CWE-918 (Server-Side Request Forgery) and it lives in the URL/IP validation layer of the TREK server, specifically the checkSsrf logic in server/src/utils/ssrfGuard.ts. That guard is responsible for rejecting outbound requests that would resolve to addresses that are not safe to fetch, and it exposes the two decision points named in the advisory - isAlwaysBlocked and isPrivateNetwork. The flaw is that these checks evaluate IPv4 space and ordinary IPv6 addresses but do not decode the IPv6 transition mechanisms that carry an embedded IPv4 destination: NAT64 (typically the 64:ff9b::/96 well-known prefix), 6to4 (2002::/16), and Teredo (2001::/32). An attacker with DNS control publishes a hostname whose AAAA record points at one of those transition prefixes with the embedded IPv4 bytes encoding a private (RFC 1918), loopback (127.0.0.0/8), or link-local (169.254.0.0/16, including the 169.254.169.254 cloud metadata endpoint) address; the guard sees a routable-looking IPv6 address and classifies it as allowed. The server then performs the egress and returns fetched content to the requester, disclosing internal service responses or cloud instance metadata. The vector's S:C (scope change) and C:H reflect that the confidentiality impact lands on resources outside the vulnerable component, while I:N/A:N confirms there is no integrity or availability effect; AC:H reflects that the environment must actually route the selected transition format (NAT64, 6to4, or Teredo) for the bypass to succeed, so deployments without such routing are not reachable through this path. The GitHub commit diff attached to the fix is dominated by repository-namespace housekeeping (mauriceboe/TREK to liketrek/TREK), confirming the project's transfer to the liketrek organization while the SSRF-guard hardening shipped in the same 3.4.0 line.
Know when Trek gets its next vulnerability
- Watch products and get an email when something new is published
- Check this CVE against your own stack and servers
- Exploit and PoC references, threat intelligence from 22 sources
No credit card · 7-day full trial
Severity by source
AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
AC:H because the deployment must route a specific IPv6 transition format and the attacker must control DNS; PR:L for the required account; S:C and C:H as the bypass reaches internal/metadata services and returns data; I:N/A:N.
Primary rating from Vendor (GitHub_M).
CVSS VectorVendor: GitHub_M
Lifecycle Timeline
1DescriptionCVE.org
TREK is a collaborative travel planner. Prior to 3.4.0, the checkSsrf logic in server/src/utils/ssrfGuard.ts does not recognize NAT64, 6to4, or Teredo IPv6 transition addresses that encode an IPv4 destination. An authenticated user who controls a DNS record can supply a URL whose AAAA result is a transition address embedding a private, loopback, or link-local IPv4 target, and isAlwaysBlocked and isPrivateNetwork classify the address as allowed. In a deployment that routes the applicable transition format, user-facing imports, webhooks, integrations, or plugin egress can reach internal services or cloud metadata and expose returned information. This issue is fixed in version 3.4.0.
Threat Intelligence Overview
How this decision was reached
The engine reads each signal below and applies a fixed list of rules from top to bottom. The first rule that matches sets the recommended action – like a statement, every line is shown.
What every action level means
SSVC AssessmentENISA
Priority Score
Attack Technique
Server-Side Request Forgery exploits applications that fetch remote resources based on user-supplied URLs.
Server-side request forgery in TREK before 3.3.0 allows an authenticated user (CVSS PR:L) to persist an attacker-control
Authentication bypass in TREK collaborative travel planner (versions prior to 2.7.2) allows authenticated attackers with
TREK, a collaborative travel-planning web application, authorizes the DELETE /api/trips/:tripId/collab/notes/:noteId/fil
Share-link token theft in TREK versions 3.0.0 through 3.0.x allows any ordinary authenticated user to exfiltrate private
Path traversal in the liketrek TREK Public Journey Photo Proxy controller allows remote attackers - without authenticati
Improper authentication in liketrek TREK up to version 3.0.22 allows a remote unauthenticated attacker to bypass the OID
Incorrect authorization in liketrek TREK's Journey Photo Proxy (all versions through 3.0.22) enables remote unauthentica
Server-Side Request Forgery in TREK, a collaborative travel planner, allows any authenticated user to pivot the server i
Authentication bypass in liketrek TREK up to v3.0.22 allows a remote attacker with valid credentials to circumvent two-f
TREK, a self-hosted collaborative travel planner, returns complete trip itinerary data - day plans, assignments, notes,
SQL injection in liketrek TREK's Journey Entry Update endpoint allows authenticated remote attackers to manipulate under
Insecure direct object reference in TREK collaborative travel planner before 3.1.3 allows any authenticated user with fi
EUVD-2026-86342
NVD
CVE.org
EPSS
GitHub
Exploit-DB