Next.js Improper Middleware Redirect Handling Leads to SSRF
Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it; Cloudflare blocks by default. Our CRS test: not blocked.
Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. Prior to versions 14.2.32 and 15.4.7, when next() was used without explicitly passing the request object, it could lead to SSRF in self-hosted applications that… More
Next.js is a React framework for building full-stack web applications. Prior to versions 14.2.32 and 15.4.7, when next() was used without explicitly passing the request object, it could lead to SSRF in self-hosted applications that incorrectly forwarded user-supplied headers. This vulnerability has been fixed in Next.js versions 14.2.32 and 15.4.7. All users implementing custom middleware logic in self-hosted environments are strongly encouraged to upgrade and verify correct usage of the next() function.
Edge coverage
Claimed by vendorsAsk Vigil
AI · answers from this pageWorkers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.
Severity, decoded
CVSS 3.1Exploitable over the network under specific conditions, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to full loss of confidentiality and low impact on integrity.
How the score is built
- Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.Network
- Attack complexityThe attack only works when conditions outside the attacker's control line up.High
- Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.None
- User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.None
- ScopeThe damage stays within the vulnerable component.Unchanged
- Confidentiality impactAn attacker can read all data the affected component holds, or the most sensitive parts of it.High
- Integrity impactAn attacker can change some data, but with limited control or limited effect.Low
- Availability impactThe component keeps working normally.None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:NCISA has seen no public exploit and no attacks.
At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.
A successful attack gives limited control over the affected software or limited access to its data.
Public exploits
1 found- NucleiCVE-2025-57822.yamldetection template, replayed in our lab
Links are to third-party code: never run it outside an isolated lab.
Timeline
- 2025-08-29CVE publishedCVE List
- 2025-09-08Cloudflare ships a ruleNext.js - SSRF - CVE:CVE-2025-57822
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it throughparanoia level 1, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
- 2026-11-02Our test: OWASP Core Rule Set let it throughparanoia level 2, anomaly threshold 5, default CRS settings
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
First rule 2025-09-08, 10 days after the CVE was published.
Next.js - SSRF - CVE:CVE-2025-57822. Previous action: Log. New action: Block. This is a New Detection
AWSAWS WAF Managed Rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.
Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.
Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rules
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.
FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patches
The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.
F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each signature lists the CVEs it references, with its id and date. F5 does not state a default action; signatures enforce once staging ends in your policy.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)
This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.
OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)
We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.
Social
No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.