HTTP Requests with X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie Header, (Tue, Apr 28th)

📡 SANS ISC · 2026-04-28

HTTP Requests with X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie Header, (Tue, Apr 28th)

HTTP Requests with X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie Header

This weekend, we saw a few requests to our honeypot that included an "X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie" header. A sample request:

GET / HTTP/1.1

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,image/avif,image/webp,*/ *;q=0.8

Accept-Language: en-US,en;q=0.5

Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate, br

Cache-Control: no-cache

Pragma: no-cache

Connection: keep-alive

X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie: samesite-none-secure

Upgrade-Insecure-Requests: 1

X-Forwarded-From: 21.235.92.139

X-Real-Iphone: 21.235.92.139

Referer: [redacted, same as "Host" header]

Host: [redacted]

Vercel documents the "x-vercel-protection-bypass" header(note: no "Cookie" part) as a secret that can be configured to disable certain protections during testing. This type of bypass feature is common in various platforms. In particular, web application firewall features often need to be disabled to allow higher request rates during CI/CD pipeline operations. The value set in the header is a user-configurable secret[1].

The X-Vercel-Set-Bypass-Cookie allows testing in browsers and maintains the bypass by having the server set a cookie to indicate the bypass. There are two options according to Vercel's documentation:

  • True: enables the cookie
  • samesitenone: enables the cookie, and set the same-site property to none.

I did not see the "samesite-none-secure" documented by Vercel.

The most likely intention of the header is to relax security settings, maybe even steal secrets, should Vercel expose them in the cookie. I have not had a chance to test the request against a Vercel website. Any input as to the intent is welcome.

The request was also set via an open proxy, likely to protect the attacker's identity, but it failed due to the configured proxy headers.

[1] https://vercel.com/docs/deployment-protection/methods-to-bypass-deployment-protection/protection-bypass-automation

--

Johannes B. Ullrich, Ph.D. , Dean of Research, SANS.edu

Twitter|


📌 来源: SANS ISC | 📅 2026-04-28

[!] CONTACT_CHANNELS

如需商务合作、技术咨询或漏洞反馈,请通过以下离岸节点联系作者。

> PING_AUTHOR (@A1RedTeam)