HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2025 54381 bentoml ssrf vulnerability in file upload
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Critical · CVSS 9.9CVE-2025-54381GHSA-MRMQ-3Q62-6CC8

BentoML SSRF Vulnerability in File Upload ProcessingCVE-2025-54381

Answer in brief

CVE-2025-54381 records a Critical severity (CVSS 9.9) vulnerability in BentoML SSRF Vulnerability in File Upload Processing. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps bentoml (pip). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Jul 29, 2025Updated Oct 27, 2026Source checked Oct 27, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 27, 2026Material review Oct 27, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Critical · CVSS 9.9
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
1 mapped package or product
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 9.9. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps bentoml (pip). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
bentomlpip>=1.4.0,<1.4.191.4.19

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for bentoml.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update bentoml to 1.4.19 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Jul 29, 2025

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 27, 2026

    Evidence: source:ghsa:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Oct 27, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
  • Source referencepypi.org
Upstream source description

### Description There's an SSRF in the file upload processing system that allows remote attackers to make arbitrary HTTP requests from the server without authentication. The vulnerability exists in the serialization/deserialization handlers for multipart form data and JSON requests, which automatically download files from user-provided URLs without proper validation of internal network addresses. The framework automatically registers any service endpoint with file-type parameters (`pathlib.Path`, `PIL.Image.Image`) as vulnerable to this attack, making it a framework-wide security issue that affects most real-world ML services handling file uploads. While BentoML implements basic URL scheme validation in the `JSONSerde` path, the `MultipartSerde` path has no validation whatsoever, and neither path restricts access to internal networks, cloud metadata endpoints, or localhost services. The documentation explicitly promotes this URL-based file upload feature, making it an intended but insecure design that exposes all deployed services to SSRF attacks by default. ### Source - Sink Analysis **Source:** User-controlled multipart form field values and JSON request bodies containing URLs **Call Chain - Path 1 (MultipartSerde - No Validation):** 1. HTTP POST request with multipart form data to any BentoML endpoint with file-type input parameters 2. `MultipartSerde.parse_request()` in `src/_bentoml_impl/serde.py:202` processes the request 3. `form = await request.form()` parses multipart data using Starlette 4. For file-type fields: `value = [await self.ensure_file(v) for v in form.getlist(k)]` at line 209 5. `MultipartSerde.ensure_file()` called at lines 186-200 with user-controlled string URL 6. **Sink:** `resp = await client.get(obj)` at line 193 - Direct HTTP request with zero validation **Call Chain - Path 2 (JSONSerde - Weak Validation):** 1. HTTP POST request with JSON body containing URL to endpoint with `IORootModel` + `multipart_fields` 2. `JSONSerde.parse_request()` in `src/_bentoml_impl/serde.py:157` processes the request 3. `body = await request.body()` extracts request body 4. Condition check: `if issubclass(cls, IORootModel) and cls.multipart_fields:` at line 164 5. Weak validation: `if is_http_url(url := body.decode("utf-8", "ignore")):` at line 165 (only checks scheme) 6. **Sink:** `resp = await client.get(url)` at line 168 - HTTP request after insufficient validation ### Proof of Concept Create a BentoML service: ```python from pathlib import Path import bentoml @bentoml.service class ImageProcessor: @bentoml.api def process_image(self, image: Path) -> str: return f"Processed image: {image}" ``` Deploy and exploit: ```bash # Start service (binds to 0.0.0.0:3000 by default) bentoml serve service.py:ImageProcessor # SSRF Attack 1 - Access AWS metadata curl -X POST http://target:3000/process_image \ -F 'image=http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/' # SSRF Attack 2 - Internal service enumeration curl -X POST http://target:3000/process_image \ -F 'image=http://localhost:8080/admin' # SSRF Attack 3 - Internal network scanning curl -X POST http://target:3000/process_image \ -F 'image=http://10.0.0.1:22' ``` Expected result: Server makes HTTP requests to internal/cloud endpoints, potentially returning sensitive data in error messages or logs. ### Impact - Access AWS/GCP/Azure cloud metadata services for credential theft - Enumerate and interact with internal HTTP services and APIs - Bypass firewall restrictions to reach internal network resources - Perform network reconnaissance from the server's perspective - Retrieve sensitive information disclosed in HTTP response data - Potential for internal service exploitation through crafted requests ### Remediation Implement comprehensive URL validation in both serialization paths by adding network restriction checks to prevent access to internal/private network ranges, localhost, and cloud metadata endpoints. The existing `is_http_url()` function should be enhanced to include allowlist validation rather than just scheme checking.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
SSRF
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-918
Source
GitHub Security Advisories
Source checked
Oct 27, 2026
References
6 linked sources
Open source record