Axios has Unrestricted Cloud Metadata Exfiltration via Header Injection Chain
Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it; Cloudflare blocks by default.
Axios is a promise based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js. Versions prior to 1.15.0 and 0.3.1 are vulnerable to a specific gadget-style attack chain in which prototype pollution in a third-party dependency may be leveraged to inject… More
Axios is a promise based HTTP client for the browser and Node.js. Versions prior to 1.15.0 and 0.3.1 are vulnerable to a specific gadget-style attack chain in which prototype pollution in a third-party dependency may be leveraged to inject unsanitized header values into outbound requests. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.15.0 and 0.3.1.
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 low impact on confidentiality and 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 some data, but has no control over what they get.Low
- 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:L/I:L/A:NPublic exploit code or a detailed write-up exists, but CISA has not seen attacks.
At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.
A successful attack gives full control over the affected software or all of its data.
Public exploits
None foundNo exploit in Exploit-DB or Metasploit, and no scanner template. That lowers, but doesn't remove, the chance of mass exploitation.
Timeline
- 2026-04-10CVE publishedCVE List
- 2026-06-09Cloudflare ships a ruleAxios - Prototype Pollution - CVE:CVE-2026-40175
Vendor statements
QuotedCloudflareWAF Managed Rules
First rule 2026-06-09, 60 days after the CVE was published.
Axios - Prototype Pollution - CVE:CVE-2026-40175. 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.