vulnerability / NVI-00012120 / Revision 1
Nezha Monitoring: Whole-instance DoS in Nezha dashboard: a member can crash the process for every tenant
GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for github.com/nezhahq/nezha. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.
This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.
01 / Meaning
Why it matters
Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.
6.5 medium
GitHub source severity; exploitability and local consequence require separate evidence.
As of · GitHub Advisory Database
02 / Applicability
The affected context
Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.
github.com/nezhahq/nezha
source listed>= 0.0.0-20260628010923-fd31e5f1b0f8, < 0.0.0-20260721131105-c893aa57867d
## Summary A single low-privilege `RoleMember` can take the entire Nezha dashboard offline, and with it every tenant's web UI, REST API, and agent connections, by racing two ordinary operations on their own service. The crash is a nil pointer dereference in the service-monitor worker at `service/singleton/servicesentinel.go:601`. The worker checks a service exists under one lock and later writes to two pointer-valued status maps under a different lock; a concurrent delete removes the entries in the gap. Because the gRPC server has no recovery interceptor, the worker-goroutine panic kills the whole process. Availability only: nothing is read or modified. ## Affected versions Confirmed in `v2.2.7` through `v2.2.10`. `service/singleton/servicesentinel.go` has the same vulnerable implementation in all four releases. The issue is fixed in `v2.2.11` and later; users should upgrade to the latest release, `v2.3.0`. ## The bug The worker validates an incoming report and later writes it to two status maps, but the check and the write are guarded by two different locks taken at two different times. Between them, the same member can delete the service and pull the map entries out from un
03 / Response
What to do next
- investigate
Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.
Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database
A fixed release is not deployment evidence.
Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.
04 / Limits
What this report cannot establish
- Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
05 / Provenance
Sources you can inspect
Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.
- GHSA-qjpp-gffx-2wm9 ↗
GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory
Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.
Public revision history
Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.
- Revision 1 ·
First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.