I didn't mean to suggest it being what it isn't.
I allow usage patterns similar to what is being described, so it is a vulnerability in something, be it my fault or not.
I allow usage patterns similar to what is being described, so it is a vulnerability in something, be it my fault or not.
169.254.0.0/16 is link-local range which you should be flitering along with publicly routable ip ranges that might be very upset if you access them like .mil reserved ip ranges. Go as far to also only allow DNS names instead of arbitrary ip, keeping in mind dns names may resolve to non publicly routable ranges or ranges you may not wish to access. These are all standard dangers of making queries on a user's behalf.
Good list of ipv4 ranges you should not allow: https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/masscan/blob/master/dat...