VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 29 Oct 2026

CVE-2025-54121: Esphome · Starlette has possible denial-of-service vector when parsing large files in multipart forms

Affects esphomeSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2025-54121· Medium 5.3

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium · fixed in 2026.2.0 : update esphome when convenient.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 07:30 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.3Medium

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

Patch: Available – fixed in 2026.2.0, 2025.12.3, 2025.10.0 +1

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 21 Jul 2025
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 29 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

Upgrade esphome to 2026.2.0, 2025.12.3, 2025.10.0 or 2023.10.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewesphome`pkg:brew/esphome`Other threats	Affected >=2022.1.2 <2023.10.0 >=2024.2.1 <2025.10.0 >=2025.10.2 <2025.12.3 >=2025.12.5_1 <2026.2.0	Fixed in 2023.10.0 2025.10.0 2025.12.3 2026.2.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

### Summary When parsing a multi-part form with large files (greater than the [default max spool size](https://github.com/encode/starlette/blob/fa5355442753f794965ae1af0f87f9fec1b9a3de/starlette/formparsers.py#L126)) `starlette` will block the main thread to roll the file over to disk. This blocks the event thread which means we can't accept new connections. ### Details Please see this discussion for details: https://github.com/encode/starlette/discussions/2927#discussioncomment-13721403. In summary the following UploadFile code (copied from [here](https://github.com/encode/starlette/blob/fa5355442753f794965ae1af0f87f9fec1b9a3de/starlette/datastructures.py#L436C5-L447C14)) has a minor bug. Instead of just checking for `self._in_memory` we should also check if the additional bytes will cause a rollover. ```python @property def _in_memory(self) -> bool: # check for SpooledTemporaryFile._rolled rolled_to_disk = getattr(self.file, "_rolled", True) return not rolled_to_disk async def write(self, data: bytes) -> None: if self.size is not None: self.size += len(data) if self._in_memory: self.file.write(data) else: await run_in_threadpool(self.file.write, data) ``` I have already created a PR which fixes the problem: https://github.com/encode/starlette/pull/2962 ### PoC See the discussion [here](https://github.com/encode/starlette/discussions/2927#discussioncomment-13721403) for steps on how to reproduce. ### Impact To be honest, very low and not many users will be impacted. Parsing large forms is already CPU intensive so the additional IO block doesn't slow down `starlette` that much on systems with modern HDDs/SSDs. If someone is running on tape they might see a greater impact.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…