Home/CVE/A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in a GraphQL service component shared by Altium Enterprise Ser
CVE
CVE-2026-11424
A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in a GraphQL service component shared by Altium Enterprise Ser
A server-side request forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in a GraphQL service component shared by Altium Enterprise Server and Altium 365. An authenticated user can submit a request whose input is treated as a URL by the server and used to issue an outbound HTTP GET request without URL validation or destination filtering. The response body is then returned to the user. This allows an authenticated attacker to reach internal services and metadata endpoints that would not otherwise be accessible from the public network, and to retrieve their contents. The impact is information disclosure and internal infrastructure reconnaissance.
the request primitive is limited to HTTP GET with no custom headers. Altium Enterprise Server is fixed in 8.1.1.
the issue has been remediated in Altium 365 at the service level.
EPSS 0.00043
Monitor
- ⚠ NVD has not scored this CVE yet - manual triage required (common for recent CVEs)
Sigma rules0
YARA rules0
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
▸
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-11424, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked.
EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal.
CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score.
Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits.
PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).
◆
ATT&CK techniques
20Techniques this CVE enables - linked via CWECAPECATT&CK. High◆ = named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei templates.
T1007 · System Service Discovery T1016 · System Network Configuration Discovery T1018 · Remote System Discovery T1033 · System Owner/User Discovery T1036.005 · Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location T1046 · Network Service Discovery T1049 · System Network Connections Discovery T1057 · Process Discovery T1069 · Permission Groups Discovery T1082 · System Information Discovery T1083 · File and Directory Discovery T1087 · Account Discovery T1111 · Multi-Factor Authentication Interception T1120 · Peripheral Device Discovery T1124 · System Time Discovery T1134.001 · Token Impersonation/Theft T1135 · Network Share Discovery T1217 · Browser Information Discovery T1550.004 · Web Session Cookie T1562.003 · Impair Command History Logging
▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques
▤
CAPEC attack patterns
12Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.
CAPEC-CAPEC-116 · Excavation CAPEC-CAPEC-13 · Subverting Environment Variable Values CAPEC-CAPEC-169 · Footprinting CAPEC-CAPEC-22 · Exploiting Trust in Client CAPEC-CAPEC-224 · Fingerprinting CAPEC-CAPEC-285 · ICMP Echo Request Ping CAPEC-CAPEC-287 · TCP SYN Scan CAPEC-CAPEC-290 · Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records CAPEC-CAPEC-291 · DNS Zone Transfers CAPEC-CAPEC-292 · Host Discovery CAPEC-CAPEC-293 · Traceroute Route Enumeration CAPEC-CAPEC-294 · ICMP Address Mask Request
⬡
Weakness Classification
▣
Scoring & Timeline
SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment
Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial
SSVC asks the questions that actually drive patch urgency: is it being exploited, can attacks be automated, and how total is the impact.
🔗
References & Sources
1Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.