@fastify/http-proxy vulnerable to prefix escape via percent-encoded backslash dot-segments
Affects @fastify/http-proxy 11.6.0 through 11.6.2 when configured with prefix and rewritePrefix options and the upstream treats %5C as a path separator. Fixed in 11.6.3.
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- Fixed in 11.6.3
- Who is exposed
- Not reported
Do first: Upgrade to a fixed version: 11.6.3.
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- Published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 13/100 · provisional
- How many real-world setups can hit the bug, from the vendor's advisory and CISA data. It does not know your setup.What do these mean? →
- Unclear
- Fix
- Fixed in 11.6.3
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
- Exploitation: none
- Automatable: no
- Technical impact: partial
Summary
@fastify/http-proxy, a Fastify plugin that forwards requests to an upstream server under a configured path prefix, is affected. An unauthenticated remote attacker can craft a request that escapes that prefix and retrieves resources on the upstream server that were meant to be off-limits, exposing information without modifying anything.
Read the original description
@fastify/http-proxy is a Fastify plugin that proxies HTTP requests to an upstream server under a configured prefix. In versions 11.6.0 through 11.6.2, the destination validation normalizes literal backslashes before it percent-decodes the request path, so a path that encodes its backslashes and dot-segments survives the dot-segment check and is only turned into backslash and double-dot sequences after that check has passed. When the upstream resolves on a platform that treats a backslash as a path separator, the forwarded request walks out of the configured proxy prefix and reaches a sibling location on the upstream. An unauthenticated remote attacker can use this to retrieve upstream resources outside the intended prefix, so the impact is confidentiality only, and exploitation depends on the upstream's path handling. The issue is fixed in @fastify/http-proxy 11.6.3, and users should upgrade to 11.6.3 or later. This is a follow-up to the earlier prefix-escape fix, which did not account for the encoded-backslash form.
What to do
Upgrade to a fixed version: 11.6.3.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
- CISA SSVC assessment
Exploitation: none · Automatable: no · Technical impact: partial
- Record last updated
Affected versions
- @fastify/http-proxy @fastify/http-proxy
From 11.6.0 · fixed in 11.6.3
Evidence 2
- Advisory
- Link
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-120214
What does this mean?
A request using a percent-encoded backslash and dot-segments can escape the configured prefix, so the proxy can fetch upstream paths that rewritePrefix was meant to hide. This is a confidentiality loss and, depending on the upstream, can enable SSRF or an authorization bypass in the proxied service.Source: github.com
Am I affected, and how do I check?
Versions 11.6.0 through 11.6.2 are affected, and only when the proxy uses prefix and rewritePrefix and the upstream decodes %5C and treats the backslash as a path separator, such as a Windows host serving static files. To check, look at the @fastify/http-proxy version in package.json or the lockfile, and review the prefix and rewritePrefix options in the proxy registration.Source: github.com
What should I do about it?
Upgrade @fastify/http-proxy to 11.6.3 or later.Source: github.com
Is it being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data