Bug 2494100 - CVE-2026-53537 python-multipart: Python-Multipart: Information disclosure via header parsing discrepancy [epel-all]
Summary: CVE-2026-53537 python-multipart: Python-Multipart: Information disclosure via...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora EPEL
Classification: Fedora
Component: python-python-multipart
Version: epel10
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ben Beasley
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard: {"flaws": ["7914e0a0-4fe7-4db4-9e13-d...
Depends On:
Blocks: CVE-2026-53537
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2026-06-29 07:33 UTC by Ganesh
Modified: 2026-06-29 08:00 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2026-06-29 08:00:52 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ganesh 2026-06-29 07:33:41 UTC
Disclaimer: Community trackers are created by Red Hat Product Security team on a best effort basis. Package maintainers are required to ascertain if the flaw indeed affects their package, before starting the update process.

Python-Multipart is a streaming multipart parser for Python. Prior to 0.0.30, parse_options_header parsed Content-Disposition (and Content-Type) headers with email.message.Message, which transparently applies RFC 2231/5987 decoding. The extended parameter syntax (filename*=charset'lang'value, name*=..., and the filename*0/filename*1 continuation form) is decoded and surfaced under the bare filename/name key, and overrides the plain parameter when both are present. RFC 7578 §4.2 explicitly forbids the filename* form in multipart/form-data. Components that follow RFC 7578, or that do not implement RFC 2231/5987 decoding for multipart/form-data (WAFs, proxies, gateways), may interpret such a header differently. An attacker can exploit that difference to smuggle a different field name or filename past an upstream inspector to the backend. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.0.30.

Comment 1 Ben Beasley 2026-06-29 08:00:52 UTC
This CVE refers to a different package, which is already at a version containing the fix in EPEL10. The EPEL9 branch is affected, but an incompatible update would be required, the necessary changes aren’t quite trivial to backport, and the low severity of this CVE does not appear to justify requesting an Updates Policy exception and coordinating an incompatible update.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.