VulnerabilityPublished 13 Aug 2026Updated 4 Nov 2026

CVE-2026-53540: python-multipart · Negative Content-Length in parse_form buffers the entire body in memory

Affects gptmeSource GCVE Database

Compare

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-53540· Low 3.7

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low : upgrade to 0.31.0_12 when convenient.

Data as of 4 Nov 2026, 21:27 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 27% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.31.0_12

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
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 22 Jun 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 4 Nov 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 gptme to 0.31.0_12.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Homebrewgptme`pkg:brew/gptme`Other threats	Affected >=0.28.0 <0.31.0_12	Fixed in 0.31.0_12

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

AI-suggested

Upgrade python-multipart to version 0.31.0_12 or later, which rejects negative Content-Length headers with a ValueError before reading the request body. If using bespoke WSGI or http.server handlers that call parse_form() directly, ensure they normalize or validate Content-Length headers to prevent negative values.

Description

The python-multipart library's parse_form() function did not validate the Content-Length header for negative values, causing a negative Content-Length to trigger reading the entire request body into memory at once instead of in chunks. This affects only code that calls parse_form() directly with attacker-controlled negative Content-Length headers without normalization. Common frameworks like Starlette, FastAPI, and Werkzeug are not affected. The issue can degrade availability under concurrent requests but does not cause complete denial of service. Version 0.31.0_12 and later reject negative Content-Length values to prevent this behavior.

Impact

The impact is limited to increased memory consumption and potential availability degradation when handling requests with negative Content-Length headers in vulnerable custom handlers. It does not cause data confidentiality or integrity loss, nor complete denial of service. No known packages or popular frameworks are affected in typical usage.

Summary

The vulnerability in python-multipart's parse_form() arises because it parses the Content-Length header as an integer without checking for negative values. When a negative Content-Length (e.g., -1) is provided, the chunk size calculation becomes negative, causing input_stream.read(-1) to read until EOF, loading the entire request body into memory in a single read rather than in bounded chunks. This can lead to increased memory usage and availability degradation under concurrent requests. However, this only affects bespoke WSGI or http.server handlers that forward raw client headers directly to parse_form() without normalization. Popular frameworks do not call parse_form() in this vulnerable manner. The issue is fixed in python-multipart version 0.31.0_12, which raises a ValueError on negative Content-Length before reading the stream.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 4 Nov 2026, 20:34 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats