Vulnerability Database

374,644

Total vulnerabilities in the database

rclone: WebDAV Credentials Survive a Same-Host HTTPS-to-HTTP Redirect — github.com/rclone/rclone

Cleartext Transmission of Sensitive Information

1. Summary

WebDAV's default redirect handling can replay Basic authorization and configured Cookie headers over plaintext HTTP after a same-host HTTPS-to-HTTP redirect. This was reproduced through the real backend. Unlike the low-impact STS token in rclone's published S3 redirect advisory, Basic passwords and session cookies are complete reusable credentials, supporting a High rating when they grant normal WebDAV read/write access.

The credible threat requires a legitimate endpoint, gateway, or accelerator to emit an unsafe redirect and an adjacent/on-path actor to observe the plaintext hop. A report should not rely on a malicious original WebDAV endpoint because that endpoint already receives the credentials.

2. Affected Assets & Attack Surface

  • Backend configuration/authentication: backend/webdav/webdav.go:127-139, 170-206, 440-530
  • Shared redirect callback: lib/rest/rest.go:218-231
  • HTTP client: fs/fshttp/http.go:311-329
  • Credentials: Basic passwords, bearer authorization, SharePoint/session cookies, and configured secret headers
  • Confirmed affected version: <= v1.74.0-240

3. Technical Root Cause Analysis

PreserveMethodRedirectFn limits redirect count and restores the original method, but it does not reject a transport downgrade or compare the full origin tuple. The client therefore relies on Go's hostname-oriented sensitive-header forwarding rules. Those rules can preserve Authorization and Cookie on a same-host redirect even when the new scheme is plaintext HTTP.

4. Proof-of-Concept & Evidence

  1. Configure the actual WebDAV backend with Basic credentials and a Cookie.
  2. Have the TLS endpoint return 307 Temporary Redirect to an HTTP listener on the same hostname and a different port.
  3. rclone follows the redirect while preserving the WebDAV method.
  4. The plaintext listener receives both the Basic Authorization value and Cookie.

5. Impact Assessment

An on-path observer can reuse the captured password, bearer token, or session cookie for the account's permitted WebDAV operations. Confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact depend on that account's permissions.

6. Remediation Guidance

  • Reject every HTTPS-to-HTTP redirect before replay.
  • Forward authenticated requests by default only when scheme, hostname, and effective port are unchanged.
  • Strip authorization, cookies, proxy credentials, and configured secret headers on all other redirects.
  • Put necessary provider exceptions behind exact destination allowlists.
  • Cover 301, 302, 303, 307, and 308 in regression tests.
  • Published: Aug 5, 2026
  • Updated: Aug 6, 2026
  • GHSA: GHSA-h4mf-4v27-hggj
  • Severity: Medium
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Medium
  • Score: 5.3
  • AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

CWEs:

OWASP TOP 10:

Software From Fixed in
Go icon github.com/rclone/rclone - 1.75.0

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.