CVE-2026-54017

Home/CVE/Open WebUI is a self-hosted artificial intelligence platform designed to operate entirely offline. Prior to 0.9.6, the t

CVE

Open WebUI is a self-hosted artificial intelligence platform designed to operate entirely offline. Prior to 0.9.6, the t

Open WebUI is a self-hosted artificial intelligence platform designed to operate entirely offline. Prior to 0.9.6, the terminal-server reverse proxy in backend/open_webui/routers/terminals.py does not fully confine the user-controlled path segment before forwarding it to an admin-configured terminal server. An authenticated user who has been granted access to a terminal server can craft path values containing encoded ../ traversal sequences that escape the intended path (or policy) scope on that server, reaching unintended endpoints and files on the terminal-server host. Where the terminal server fans requests out to internal services, this also gives SSRF-style reach into those services. This is a separate code path from the /api/v1/retrieval/process/web SSRF (GHSA-c6xv-rcvw-v685), with its own input. Two distinct vectors are consolidated here: first, raw path forwarding / single-encoded traversal (original report)

and second, a bypass of the subsequently-added _sanitize_proxy_path mitigation using double-encoded dots (%252e%252e). The attacker-controlled input is the request path, supplied by the non-admin user, not anything an administrator configures, so this is not an admin-trust / Rule-9 situation. Version 0.9.6 fixes the issue.

HIGH · CVSS 7.7 EPSS 0.00039

Schedule remediation

CVSS base score ≥ 7.0

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-2026-54017, 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-2026-54017

◆

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 T1482 · Domain Trust Discovery T1090 · Proxy 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-126 · Path Traversal CAPEC-CAPEC-64 · Using Slashes and URL Encoding Combined to Bypass Validation Logic CAPEC-CAPEC-664 · Server Side Request Forgery CAPEC-CAPEC-76 · Manipulating Web Input to File System Calls CAPEC-CAPEC-78 · Using Escaped Slashes in Alternate Encoding CAPEC-CAPEC-79 · Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding

⬡

Weakness Classification

CWE-22Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')

CWE-918Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

▤

Affected Packages

Language-ecosystem packages (from OSV) tied to this CVE, with the version that fixes it - the dependency-level detail NVD doesn’t carry.

PyPI open-webui HIGH fixed in 0.9.6

▣

Scoring & Timeline

7.7

HIGH · CVSS v3.1 · [email protected]

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 NVD18 Jun 2026 · 10:16 PM

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

🔗

References & Sources

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

https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui/security/advisories/GHSA-r2wg-2mcr-66rv