Blind SSRF via pingback DNS rebinding
Published Dec 14, 2022 · Updated Apr 21, 2025
Blind SSRF in the pingback feature in WordPress 4.1.30 through 6.1.1 allows remote attackers to reach internal hosts. The pingback.ping XML-RPC method validates pagelinkedfrom by resolving its hostname, but the HTTP transport resolves it again, allowing DNS rebinding between check and use. Pingbacks are enabled by default and require no authentication; the blind response limits direct disclosure, but the server can probe otherwise blocked internal services.
Summary
What happened
Blind SSRF in the pingback feature in WordPress 4.1.30 through 6.1.1 allows remote attackers to reach internal hosts. The pingback.ping XML-RPC method validates pagelinkedfrom by resolving its hostname, but the HTTP transport resolves it again, allowing DNS rebinding between check and use. Pingbacks are enabled by default and require no authentication; the blind response limits direct disclosure, but the server can probe otherwise blocked internal services.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2022-3590
- Published
- Dec 14, 2022
- Updated
- Apr 21, 2025
- Vendor
- WordPress.org
- Product
- WordPress
- Classifications
- CWE-367, CWE-918, T1046, T1190
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Dec 14, 2022CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Apr 21, 2025Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=4.1.30 <=6.1.1
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- SonarSource pingback.ping DNS-rebinding proof of conceptproof of concept · demonstrated
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo