LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2017-0906: The Recurly Client Python Library before 2.0.5, 2.1.16, 2.2.22, 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.5.1, 2.6.2 is vulnerable to...

The Recurly Client Python Library before 2.0.5, 2.1.16, 2.2.22, 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.5.1, 2.6.2 is vulnerable to a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability in the "Resource.get" method that could result in compromise of API keys or other critical resources.

UnknownCVSS not scoredNot KEV-listedUpdated
Discuss exposureBack to CVEs
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysishigh

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

CVE-2017-0906 affects older Recurly Python client versions. A flaw in Resource.get can allow server-side request forgery, meaning an attacker may cause an application server to make unintended internal or external requests, potentially exposing API keys or other sensitive resources.

Executive priority

Treat this as a targeted dependency remediation item. It is not documented as actively exploited in the supplied sources, but the stated impact includes possible API key compromise, so internet-facing or payment-related services using vulnerable versions should be upgraded promptly.

Technical view

The issue is CWE-918 SSRF in the Recurly Client Python Library Resource.get method. Versions before 2.0.5, 2.1.16, 2.2.22, 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.5.1, and 2.6.2 are listed as vulnerable. Public sources identify a confirming GitHub commit and Recurly Python update page.

Likely exposure

Exposure is likely limited to applications using the affected Recurly Python module versions, especially where application-controlled or user-influenced values reach Resource.get. Systems not using this library or already on fixed versions are not indicated as affected by the supplied sources.

Exploitation context

The supplied sources do not show CISA KEV listing or confirmed active exploitation. The CVE description states possible compromise of API keys or critical resources, but does not provide CVSS scoring or detailed exploitation prevalence.

Researcher notes

The evidence is clear on affected library and fixed version thresholds, but incomplete on CVSS, exploit maturity, and operational indicators. Focus validation on dependency version, Resource.get usage, and whether vulnerable deployments could reach metadata services, internal endpoints, or secret-bearing resources.

Mitigation direction

  • Upgrade the Recurly Python module to the fixed version for your branch or later.
  • Prioritize systems where Recurly calls run with sensitive API keys or internal network access.
  • Review vendor guidance and the linked commit before planning compensating controls.
  • Avoid passing untrusted or externally controlled values into Resource.get paths.

Validation and detection

  • Inventory Python dependency manifests and runtime images for the recurly package version.
  • Confirm affected branches are at 2.0.5, 2.1.16, 2.2.22, 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.5.1, 2.6.2, or later.
  • Review application code paths that call Resource.get with request-derived data.
  • Check secret exposure risk for environments where vulnerable code executed.
Prepared
Confidence
medium
Sources
5

Public sources used

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

cwe · medium confidence lookup

CWE-918: Information exposure and cloud metadata lookup

Information exposure and SSRF weaknesses can make discovery, cloud metadata, and credential material review relevant. Open the exact CWE lookup page first, then review the ATT&CK searches from that MITRE weakness context. This is a Glexia lookup hint, not an official ATT&CK mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
description · low confidence lookup

Cloud metadata behavior lookup

The CVE wording references SSRF or metadata access, so cloud discovery and credential material review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2017-0906 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Unknown
CVSS
Not scored
Known Exploited
No
Published
Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

0CVSS vectors
0Timeline events
0ADP providers
4Source links

CVSS and timeline data

No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
Recurlyrecurly python moduleVersions before 2.0.5, 2.1.16, 2.2.22, 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.5.1, 2.6.2Listed
Weakness

CWE details

CWE-918

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.

CWE-918 · source CWE mapping

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) represents a recurring weakness pattern that can create exploitable paths when design, validation, or implementation controls are missing.

Open CWE intelligenceSame-CWE CVEs