VulnerabilityPublished 30 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-55613: openwrt uhttpd · HTTP Request Smuggling

Affects openwrt uhttpdSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 22:22 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 4.0	6.9

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Oct 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
openwrtuhttpd	Affected =< 7b1bec45826bd78c8afc993435bdc0f1df2fe399	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Repository patches have been committed to fix this vulnerability. Users should apply the official patches identified by commits 7b1bec45826bd78c8afc993435bdc0f1df2fe399 and b2285de129b9adc8b12f84f9a27c16c21f2b57a5 to their uhttpd installations. Since this is not a cloud service, manual patching is required. No vendor advisory content was provided to indicate alternative mitigations or if the issue is already mitigated in certain configurations.

Description

CVE-2026-55613 is an HTTP request smuggling vulnerability in the uhttpd server used by OpenWrt. The flaw occurs when a POST /ubus JSON body arrives in multiple TCP segments, causing desynchronization of HTTP request boundaries. This leads to the server processing an embedded HTTP request in the unread body suffix as a new request on the same keep-alive connection. The issue affects deployments with ubus enabled, including default OpenWrt configurations. Repository patches have been made to address this vulnerability.

Impact

An attacker can exploit this vulnerability to smuggle HTTP requests, potentially causing the server to process unintended requests on a persistent connection. This can lead to request confusion or bypass of security controls relying on proper request boundary parsing. The CVSS 4.0 score of 6.9 (medium severity) reflects the network attack vector, low complexity, no privileges or user interaction required, and limited impact on integrity. There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.

Summary

The vulnerability in uhttpd arises from improper handling of segmented POST /ubus JSON bodies. Specifically, the function uh_ubus_data_send() can desynchronize HTTP request boundaries when the JSON body is split across multiple TCP segments. An initial segment completes a JSON object and sets du->jsobj, but a subsequent segment triggers a parse-error path returning zero bytes consumed. The caller then fails to drain the remaining Content-Length or set connection_close, causing the unread body suffix to be interpreted as a new HTTP request on the same connection. This application-layer flaw differs from typical Transfer-Encoding or chunk-length issues and impacts OpenWrt deployments with ubus enabled. Patches identified by commits 7b1bec45826bd78c8afc993435bdc0f1df2fe399 and b2285de129b9adc8b12f84f9a27c16c21f2b57a5 fix the issue.

CWE-444Inconsistent Interpretation of HTTP Requests (HTTP Request Smuggling) (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The product acts as an intermediary HTTP agent (such as a proxy or firewall) in the data flow between two entities such as a client and server, but it does not interpret malformed HTTP requests or responses in ways that are consistent with how the messages will be processed by those entities that are at the ultimate destination.
Implementation
Use a web server that employs a strict HTTP parsing procedure, such as Apache.
Implementation
Use only SSL communication.
Implementation
Terminate the client session after each request.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Assessment (opens in a new tab)
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
Cross-Site Request Forgery Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.2.5 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
HTTP Response Smuggling (opens in a new tab)
HTTP Request Smuggling (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 30 Oct 2026, 22:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-444

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats