CVE-2026-11525

Home/CVE/Impact: When undici parses a Set-Cookie header, it accepts any SameSite attribute value that contains Strict, Lax, or No

CVE

Impact: When undici parses a Set-Cookie header, it accepts any SameSite attribute value that contains Strict, Lax, or No

Impact: When undici parses a Set-Cookie header, it accepts any SameSite attribute value that contains Strict, Lax, or None as a substring, rather than the case-insensitive exact match specified by RFC 6265. Non-spec values are silently mapped to one of the three standard tokens. For example, SameSite=NoneOfYourBusiness is parsed as None (the most permissive setting), and SameSite=StrictLax is parsed as Lax (a downgrade from Strict).

Affected applications are those that consume Set-Cookie headers from server responses (for example via undici's fetch or proxy code paths) and then forward or rely on the parsed sameSite attribute. A malicious or non-compliant server can coerce the consumer's view of a cookie's SameSite policy to a weaker value, silently degrading the SameSite enforcement the cookie is supposed to provide. This was introduced in undici 5.15.0 when the cookies feature was added.

Patches: Upgrade to undici v6.26.0, v7.28.0 or v8.5.0. Workarounds: After parsing a Set-Cookie header, validate that the resulting sameSite attribute is one of 'Strict', 'Lax', or 'None' (exact, case-insensitive) before forwarding or relying on it.

LOW · CVSS 3.7 EPSS 0.00197

Monitor

No active-exploitation, high-EPSS, or public-exploit signals - routine patching cadence

Sigma rules0 YARA rules0

Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots

NVD CVE.org CISA Vulners Exploit-DB GitHub PoC VulnCheck KEV GreyNoise

▸ How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch

This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-11525, 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).

View attack path from CVE-2026-11525

◆

ATT&CK techniques

Techniques this CVE enables - linked via CWECAPECATT&CK. High◆ = named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei templates.

T1190 · Exploit Public-Facing Application

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques

▤

CAPEC attack patterns

Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.

CAPEC-CAPEC-120 · Double Encoding CAPEC-CAPEC-3 · Using Leading 'Ghost' Character Sequences to Bypass Input Filters CAPEC-CAPEC-43 · Exploiting Multiple Input Interpretation Layers CAPEC-CAPEC-71 · Using Unicode Encoding to Bypass Validation Logic

⬡

Weakness Classification

CWE-183Permissive List of Allowed Inputs

▣

Scoring & Timeline

3.7

LOW · CVSS v3.1 · ce714d77-add3-4f53-aff5-83d477b104bb

View on NVD

Attack Vector

Network Adjacent Local Physical

Attack Complexity

Low High

Privileges Required

None Low High

User Interaction

None Required

Scope

Unchanged Changed

Confidentiality

None Low High

Integrity

None Low High

Availability

None Low High

Published to NVD17 Jun 2026 · 06:17 PM

CVSS VectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment

Exploitation

none

Automatable

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

Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.

https://cna.openjsf.org/security-advisories.html

https://github.com/nodejs/undici/security/advisories/GHSA-g8m3-5g58-fq7m