Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | smlx's commentslogin

next.js has a history of similar vulnerabilities.

I was made aware recently of a vulnerability that was fixed by this patch: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/73482/files

In this vulnerability, adding a 'x-middleware-rewrite: https://www.example.com' header would cause the server to respond with the contents of example.com. i.e. the worlds dumbest SSRF.

Note that there is no CVE for this vulnerability, nor is there any clear information about which versions are affected.

Also note that according to the published support policy for nextjs only "stable" (15.2.x) and "canary" (15.3.x) receive patches. But for the vulnerability reported here they are releasing patches for 14.x and 13.x apparently?

https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/r...

IMO you are playing with fire using nextjs for anything where you care about security and maintenance. Which seems insane for a project with 130k+ Github stars and supported by a major company like vercel.


Heh, that commit you linked added a bunch of headers to INTERNAL_HEADERS (to prevent external use) but they forgot to add the one in this particular vulnerability. This was done in December 2024. There were probably a myriad of vulnerabilities with these headers before that commit. Wild it wasn’t a CVE.


Look, we need to show some restraint here and some class. Vercel has only raised $538 million dollars, its not reasonable to be so critical of their security practices when weighed against the business value of their products.


Not to mention the same critical vulnerability in Clerk's Next.js SDK, which should've been a wake up call.

https://clerk.com/changelog/2024-02-02#:~:text=Our%20solutio...


'Next.js has published 16 security advisories since 2016' - https://nextjs.org/blog/cve-2025-29927

At first read that sounds very reasonable! But then you realize that not all vulnerabilities got a security advisory...


I came up with a simpler solution that keeps kube contexts separated per terminal.

https://smlx.dev/posts/kubectl-global-state/


I have never heard of ImHex before. Thanks, I'll take a look!


Imagine I own a bunch of billboards around town. A customer comes to me with cash and wants to display someone's personal details and a message encouraging harassment on my billboards.

Do I have to wait for law enforcement to stop me from displaying their content? Or can I, as a private company, make a judgement call and decline their business?

I think the answer here is pretty obvious and your attempt at passing the buck is pathetically weak.


Now suppose they own the billboard themselves but you're the power company they use to light up that billboard. Do you cut their power?


They can contract with a different company.


Maybe, what difference does it make? It’s a billboard.


I wrote a tool that allows me to avoid the terrible Tempo web UI - you might be interested: https://github.com/smlx/jiratime


Not if you use screen scaling.


For what it's worth, I do use screen scaling (in fact: different scales on different screens) and haven't had trouble with screen sharing on Zoom on Ubuntu in over a year.


More accurately, the developers need to a) fix the buggy implementation of the Gnome-specific protocol they currently use, and b) switch to the standard screensharing protocol.

https://github.com/flathub/us.zoom.Zoom/pull/182#issuecommen...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: