https://cve.radiocsirt.org Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Mon, 05 Oct 2026 06:17:09 +0000 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2021-39214 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> mitmproxy</p> <p>mitmproxy is an interactive, SSL/TLS-capable intercepting proxy. In mitmproxy 7.0.2 and below, a malicious client or server is able to perform HTTP request smuggling attacks through mitmproxy. This means that a malicious client/server could smuggle a request/response through mitmproxy as part of another request/response&#39;s HTTP message body. While a smuggled request is still captured as part of another request&#39;s body, it does not appear in the request list and does not go through the usual mitmproxy event hooks, where users may have implemented custom access control checks or input sanitization. Unless one uses mitmproxy to protect an HTTP/1 service, no action is required. The vulnerability has been fixed in mitmproxy 7.0.3 and above.</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> mitmproxy</p> <p>mitmproxy is an interactive, SSL/TLS-capable intercepting proxy. In mitmproxy 7.0.2 and below, a malicious client or server is able to perform HTTP request smuggling attacks through mitmproxy. This means that a malicious client/server could smuggle a request/response through mitmproxy as part of another request/response&#39;s HTTP message body. While a smuggled request is still captured as part of another request&#39;s body, it does not appear in the request list and does not go through the usual mitmproxy event hooks, where users may have implemented custom access control checks or input sanitization. Unless one uses mitmproxy to protect an HTTP/1 service, no action is required. The vulnerability has been fixed in mitmproxy 7.0.3 and above.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2021-39214 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-22gh-3r9q-xf38 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> PyPI: mitmproxy</p> <p>### Impact</p> <p>In mitmproxy 7.0.2 and below, a malicious client or server is able to perform [HTTP request smuggling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_request_smuggling) attacks through mitmproxy. This means that a malicious client/server could smuggle a request/response through mitmproxy as part of another request/response&#39;s HTTP message body. While mitmproxy would only see one request, the target server would see multiple requests. A smuggled request is still captured as part of another request&#39;s body, but it does not appear in the request list and does not go through the usual mitmproxy event hooks, where users may have implemented custom access control checks or input sanitization.</p> <p>Unless you use mitmproxy to protect an HTTP/1 service, no action is required.</p> <p>### Patches</p> <p>The vulnerability has been fixed in mitmproxy 7.0.3 and above.</p> <p>### Acknowledgements</p> <p>We thank João Sobral (@chinchila) for responsibly disclosing this vulnerability to the mitmproxy team.</p> <p>### Timeline</p> <p>- **2021-09-08**: Received initial report for mitmproxy &lt;= 6.0.2. - **2021-09-08**: Requested clarification if 7.x is affected. - **2021-09-10**: Received additional details, 7.x situation still unclear. - **2021-09-13**: Internally determined that 7.x is also affected. - **2021-09-13**: Shared initial fix with researcher. - **2021-09-14**: Received confirmation that fix is working, but H2.TE/H2.CL should also be looked at. - **2021-09-14**: Shared revised fix that includes additional H2.TE mitigatio…</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> PyPI: mitmproxy</p> <p>### Impact</p> <p>In mitmproxy 7.0.2 and below, a malicious client or server is able to perform [HTTP request smuggling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_request_smuggling) attacks through mitmproxy. This means that a malicious client/server could smuggle a request/response through mitmproxy as part of another request/response&#39;s HTTP message body. While mitmproxy would only see one request, the target server would see multiple requests. A smuggled request is still captured as part of another request&#39;s body, but it does not appear in the request list and does not go through the usual mitmproxy event hooks, where users may have implemented custom access control checks or input sanitization.</p> <p>Unless you use mitmproxy to protect an HTTP/1 service, no action is required.</p> <p>### Patches</p> <p>The vulnerability has been fixed in mitmproxy 7.0.3 and above.</p> <p>### Acknowledgements</p> <p>We thank João Sobral (@chinchila) for responsibly disclosing this vulnerability to the mitmproxy team.</p> <p>### Timeline</p> <p>- **2021-09-08**: Received initial report for mitmproxy &lt;= 6.0.2. - **2021-09-08**: Requested clarification if 7.x is affected. - **2021-09-10**: Received additional details, 7.x situation still unclear. - **2021-09-13**: Internally determined that 7.x is also affected. - **2021-09-13**: Shared initial fix with researcher. - **2021-09-14**: Received confirmation that fix is working, but H2.TE/H2.CL should also be looked at. - **2021-09-14**: Shared revised fix that includes additional H2.TE mitigatio…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-22gh-3r9q-xf38